Teaching History for Nation-Building: Locally Responsive Pedagogy and Preparation for Global Particpation

TEACHING HISTORY FOR NATION-BUILDING: LOCALLY RESPONSIVE PEDAGOGY AND PREPARATION FOR GLOBAL PARTICPATION

ANGELA MERICI ODHIAMBO

THESIS

Submitted in fulfilment of the full requirements for the degree of

PHILOSOPHIAE DOCTOR (Educationis)

CURRICULUM STUDIES

in the

FACULTY OF EDUCATION

at the

UNIVERSITY OF JOHANNESBURG

SUPERVISOR: PROF. M. M. MODIBA

2012

DECLARATION

I declare that apart from the assistance acknowleged, this dissertation is my own unaided work. Is is being submitted for the degree Doctort of Philosophy at the University of Johannesburg. It has not been submitted before for any degree in any other university.

DEDICATION

To my family and Jenny, with sincere thanks for their love, support and encouragement during my studies.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

I wish to express my appreciation to the participants in this tudy. They allowed me into their classrooms and shared with me their experiences as history teachers.

I would also like to pay special tribute to my supervisor, Prof. Maropeng M. Modiba, who worked tirelessly to ensure that I completed. Without her invaluable guidance and encouragement the completion of this study would have been unrelisable.

My gratitude also to Dr. Andrew L. Graham for his professional guidance and suggestions during the editing of this dissertation.

My heartfelt appreciation goes to the Faculty of Education and Research Office at the University of Johannesburg for their generous financial support that made it possible for me to conduct my field-work, write the thesis and attend conferences.

Further, I would like to thank Jenny xxx, my landlady, and my family, in particular, father and sister Jane without whose encouragement I could not have completed this study.

Sections of this study have been published as the following journal articles:

Modiba, M. and Odhiambo, A. (2009) : Teachers’ Understanding of a Kenyan Identity as a Basis for their Teaching Strategies. African Identities. Vol.7 (4), pp. 477-490. ISSN 1472-5843.

Modiba, M. and Odhiambo, A. (2007): Promoting Nationhood through Teaching: Fallacy or Reality? The International Journal of Interdisciplinary Social Sciences. Volume 2 (5), pp. 183- 190. or http://iji.cgpublisher.com/product/pub.88/prod.358. ISSN: 1833-1822.

iii

ABSTRACT

Being Kenyan means belonging to a number of levels, the national, the local, one’s tribe or ethnic group and supra-state. It means living in a world beyond the Kenyan nation in which absolutism, whether of the ethnic or national civic state, is no longer operative. While encouraging Kenyans to regionalize and globalize, the state in Kenya has also simultaneously sought to construct a nation and develop among Kenyans a sense of national identity. State pronouncements point out that Kenyans need to strengthen their self-identity in the midst of growing globalization and regionalization. They suggest that Kenya needs to teach History in schools to produce a new breed of citizens, imbued with a new vision, characterized by the Kenyan personality, that is individuals who are driven by a deep sense of patriotism and nationalism that transcends ethnic and traditional ties. To achieve this purpose, History teachers must enable students to apply historical knowledge to the analysis of contemporary issues and to deploy the appropriate skills of critical thinking. They teachers need to develop a critical pedagogy in which knowledge, habits, and skills of critical citizenship are taught and learnt. The study adopted a basic interpretive qualitative research design to understand the strategies that the teachers used to develop the attitudes and skills of critical thinking that enable learners to transcend their ethnic and national ties when thinking about issues that are Kenyan. Classroom observations and interviews were employed. The study involved seven provincial secondary schools situated in the Nairobi Province, Kenya. The finding is that to learn history, learners should not be simply inducted into an already existing identity. They have to be assisted to engage in open-ended debates over the nature of this identity as a way of introducing them to historical thinking that links the teaching and learning of history with its disciplined inquiry and core values and make it possible for them to understand their national identity part of a Kenyan culture that is interconnected with others at regional and global levels.

ABBREVIATIONS USED IN THE THESIS

AU African Union

EAC East African Community

MEd Master of Education

SADC Southern African Development Community

UN United Nations

TABLE OF CONTENTS Page CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION AND BACKGROUND 1.1 INTRODUCTION 1 1.2 AIM OF THE STUDY 10 1.3 ASSUMPTION OF THE STUDY 10 1.4 RESEARCH QUESTION 13 1.5 RATIONALE OF THE STUDY 15 1.6 RESEARCH DESIGN 26 1.7 DATA MANAGEMENT AND ANALYSIS 27 1.8 ORGANIZATION OF THE STUDY 27

CHAPTER 2: THE CONCEPT OF NATIONHOOD IN KENYA: ITS CONTEXT AND CONCEPTUAL IMPLICATIONS 2.1 INTRODUCTION 30 2.2 LANGUAGE GROUPS IN KENYA 30 2.3 HARAMBEE 32 2.4 KISWAHILI AS A UNIFYING LANGUAGE 32 2.5 COMPLEXITIES OF LANGUAGE AND CULTURE 33 2.6 HOMOGENIZATION OR HYBRIDTY 35 2.7 THE TRANSCULTURAL OTHER 37

CHAPTER 3: HISTORY AS A SCHOOL SUBJECT 3.1 INTRODUCTION 43 3.2 HISTORY AS DIALOGUE BETWEEN THE PRESENT AND PAST 44 3.3 APPROACHES TO TEACHING HISTORY 47 3.3.1 History as a chronologically organized tool 47 3.3.2 History as an investigation of contemporary themes 51 3.3.3 History as a form of intellectual inquiry and a way of thinking 53 3.4 IMPLICATIONS FOR CLASSROOM PRACTICES 58

CHAPTER 4: HISTORICAL STUDIES AS CURRICULUM FOR NATIONHOOD 4.1 INTRODUCTION 60 4.2 NATIONHOOD AS A CONCEPT 62 4.3 NATIONAL HISTORY AND ITS RELATIONSHIP TO GLOBALIZATION 66 4.4 CITIZENSHIP EDUCATION AS A TOOL FOR BUILDING NATIONHOOD 68

vii

CHAPTER 5: GLOBALIZATION: CULTURAL HOMOGENIZATION AND HETEROGENIZATION 5.1 INTRODUCTION 71 5.2 GLOBALIZATION: AN HISTORICAL PROCESS OF MODERNITY 71 5.3 GLOBALIZATION AS A CONFIGURATION OF THE GLOBAL AND LOCAL 75

CHAPTER 6: DEMOCRATIC DELIBERATION AS A BASIS FOR UNDERSTANDING THE SELF AND THE OTHER 6.1 INTRODUCTION 81 6.2 ACKNOWLEDGING ‘THE POLITICAL’ 83 6.2.1 Public reason 88 6.2.2 Discursive democracy 90 6.2.3 Communicative democracy 91

CHAPTER 7: RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODOLOGY 7.1 INTRODUCTION 94 7.2 RESEARCH DESIGN 96 7.3 THE RESEARCH PROCESS 100 7.3.1 Stage One 100 7.3.2 Stage Two 110 7.4. SUMMARY 124

CHAPTER 8: ETHNIC DIFFERENCES AS PRIORITY IN TEACHING HISTORY: CHALLENGES IN IMPLEMENTING POLICY 8.1 INTRODUCTION 125 8.2 EMPHASIS ON ETHNICITY 126 8.2.1 Lesson ( PBBD- [05/07/2006]) 126

8.2.2 Lesson (PBBD - [05/07/2006]) 129

8.2.3 Lesson (PBBW [13/06/2006]) 133

8.3 PROMOTING A REFINED UNDERSTANDING OF ETHNIC REPRESENTATIONS 140 8.3.1 Lesson (PGDW1 – [29/05/2006]) 141 8.3.2 Lesson (PGDW1- [31/05/2006]) 143 8.4 DISCUSSION 148

viii

CHAPTER 9: TEACHERS’ VIEWS ON CLASSROOM PRACTICES: THEIR RELATIONSHIP TO PERSPECTIVES ON NATIONHOOD 9.1 INTRODUCTION 151 9.2 TEACHERS’ UNDERSTANDING OF THE SYLLABUS 152 9.3 THE IMPORTANCE OF UNDERTANDING THE POLITICAL UNITY THAT CHARACTERIZES ETHNIC DIFFERENCE 158 9.4 TEACHERS’ MISCONCEPTIONS OF THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE

SYLLABUS 160

9.5 CONCLUSION 165

CHAPTER 10: SUMMARY OF RESEARCH FINDINGS, MAIN CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 10.1 SUMMARY OF RESEARCH FINDINGS 167 10.2 THE SIGNIFICANCE OF THE MODELS USED IN CONDUCTING THE STUDY 169 10.3 LIMITATIONS OF THE STUDY 171 10.4 CONCLUDING REMARKS 172 10.5 IMPLICATIONS 172

SELECTED REFERENCES 174 APPENDICES 192

LIST OF TABLES

7.1: Profile of schools 103

7.2: Profile of teachers 104

7.3 Profile of schools in the main study 112

7.4: Number of teachers in the study 113

7.5: Profile of teachers in main study 113

7.6: Dates when schools were visited between May and July 2006 115

7.7: Summary of the research process 119

CHAPTER 1

INTRODUCTION AND BACKGROUND

1.1 INTRODUCTION

Since independence in 1963, amongst other aims, Kenya has sought to teach History1 to enable the youth to understand themselves as Kenyans. The subject is meant to promote a coherent Afro- centric philosophy of education and enhance an appreciation of the cultural heritage of the nation, foster national unity, moral integrity and mutual social responsibility to nurture all-round development of the youth. History has to expose students to rich examples from indigenous beginnings, through the histories of settlement, development, immigration and international engagement. They have to understand the origins of the different ethnic communities, the growth of freedom and democracy, advances in science and technology, the emergence of ideals of humanity and justice, and the ways in which beliefs of peoples have changed and developed over time. These are considered important elements of the Kenyan heritage that can be drawn on to develop a sense of personal and national identity. It is acknowledged that different ethnic groups and communities may think of themselves as having different heritages, experiences, perspectives and aspirations all of which need to be considered when teaching History. It should help students to consider this diversity and cherish the unity within it. The ‘we’ from whose will the activities of government can flow spontaneously, has to be nurtured through teaching History. These national goals of education were put forward as follows:

 Foster nationalism, patriotism and promote national unity

 Promote the social, economic, technological and industrial needs for national development

 Promote individual development and self-fulfilment

 Promote social equality and responsibility

 Promote respect for and development of Kenya’s rich and varied cultures

 Promote international consciousness and foster positive attitudes to other nations.

(Ministry of Education, History Syllabus, 2000)

This syllabus is based partly on an assumption that History teachers understand that cultural conditions within Kenya are largely characterized by mixes and permeations, and that an alternative conceptualization of a cultural community is yearned for. Such a community needs to

1 I use History (upper case) to refer to the curriculum subject, and history (lower case) to the generic field or topic. 1 be viewed as transcultural. Teachers have to understand that the cultural beliefs and practices with which learners identify are complex and reflect endless elements of cultural inter-penetration. These cultures have increasingly overlapped and become interconnected. As a result, ways of living are no longer unique to ethnic or tribal groups or geo-political space. There has been a de- linking of locality and culture.

The syllabus was a product of the recommendations of the Koech Commission (2000), on the basis of which the varied cultural talents intended to serve as resources to legitimize the development of a national identity have to be considered as logically contingent upon, and sociologically consistent with the country’s aspirations for social harmony, stability and prosperity for its people. Such talents and resources are associated with the achievements of the national heroes and symbols of national unity which form major cornerstones of the Kenyan heritage.

The commission proposed that symbols around which people could be united have to confer significance on the activities of the states and by extension the civil life of its citizens. National heroes and symbols of national unity had to form major cornerstones of the Kenyan heritage. To achieve this the History curriculum had to adequately cover the biographies of national heroes, historical sites and events, as well as symbols of national unity, such as the Constitution, the national flag, coat of arms, national anthem and national sites and monuments. The ultimate goal in forging national consciousness through education, as indicated in the Koech Report (2000), was to minimize the impact of ethnicity in people’s minds, thus enabling them to live peacefully and co- operatively and thereby utilizing their varied talents for the enrichment of national life as a unitary whole.

The syllabus is organized into themes that emphasize different aspects. The Form One syllabus traces the human past to develop an understanding of the origin of man, early economic activities, origin and migration of Kenyan society. Specifically, learners have to know the different social, economic and political organization of the Bantu, Nilotes and Cushitic communities, and trace their migration and settlement history. It is also important to understand how these communities interacted with the Portuguese and the Arabs. An understanding of who Kenyans are has to be followed by themes dealing with issues related to citizenship and how a Kenyan identity has been defined. The course ends with the theme of national integration. Learners are expected to understand the factors that would promote or limit national unity. The following themes are supposed to be taught to fulfil the above stated learning outcomes:

 The meaning of history and meaning of government. Attention has to be devoted to learning about the sources of information on History and Government, the importance of studying which also has to be dealt with.

 The origin of man, stages of the evolution of humans and cultural and economic practices of early human.

 The development of agriculture. This includes tracing agricultural practices back from early practices in Mesopotamia and Egypt to the current agricultural practices and challenges mainly in the third world countries.

 The peoples of Kenya up to the 19th century, tracing their origin, migration and settlement.

 The social, economic and political organization of the Kenyan societies in the 19th century.

 The contacts between East Africa and the outside world up to the 19th century.

 Citizenship.

 National integration.

The Form Two syllabus introduces the learners to the following issues:

 Trade

 Development of transport and communication

 Development of industry

 Urbanization

 Social, economic and political organization of African societies in the 19th century

 Constitutions and constitution making

 Democracy and human rights.

Regarding trade, learners are supposed to be able to understand methods of trade, types of trade, origins, development, organization and impact of local, regional and international types of trade. They also have to learn about transport and communication, and how it impacts on the development of industry, tracing this from the Industrial Revolution in Europe to the latest industrial growth in the world. Introduction to these concepts is followed by issues relating to constitutions, democracy and human rights.

In Form Three the learners are expected to learn about:

 European invasion of Africa and the process of colonization

 Establishment of colonial rule in Kenya

 Colonial administration

 Social and economic development during the colonial period in Kenya

 Political developments and the struggle for independence in Kenya (1919-1963)

 Rise of African nationalism

 Lives and contributions of Kenyan leaders

 The formation structure and functions of the Government of Kenya.

These themes focus mainly on the process of colonization, rise of nationalism and independence histories. The learners at these levels of schooling are expected to learn, inter alia, the methods used by the Europeans to acquire colonies in Africa and be able to discuss the factors that led to the scramble for colonies in Africa in the 19th century. They should also be able to describe the process of partition, analyse its impact on the African societies and the reactions of the Africans to European colonization. This part of the syllabus focuses not only on political activities but also on social and economic activities during the colonial period. It is followed by a study of political developments, which include the struggle for independence in Kenya and the rise of African Nationalism (cf. Kishe, 2003; Mazrui, 1992; Mazrui & Mazrui; 1993).

In Form Four the syllabus constitutes the following themes:

 World Wars 1 and 2

 International relations

 Cooperation in Africa

 National philosophies

 Social, economic and political developments and challenges in Kenya since independence

 Social, economic and political developments and challenges in Africa since independence.

The course integrates political, economic and social issues that affect the society both locally and globally. Learners are expected to know the causes, course and results of the First and Second World Wars, and explain reasons for the formation of the League of Nations, describe its organization and analyse its performance. They should also analyse the reasons for the formation of major international organizations such as the United Nations (UN), the Commonwealth, the African Union (AU) and East African Community (EAC). At this level they are expected to describe the structure of these major organizations, discuss their functions, and analyse their performance and challenges. After gaining a clear understanding of the various world organizations, they are then expected to look critically at the political, social and economic

4 developments and challenges in Kenya since independence, in relation to other African countries (Scotton, 1978).

According to Ntuli (2002), Africans have entered what he describes as the “African Century”, the century of the African Renaissance. As a rebirth, he argues, it requires them to examine their knowledge systems anew, with a view to extracting some lessons from the past to distil what can be of use at this current moment and what has to be jettisoned. Ntuli also highlights the point that the encounter between the West and Africa resulted in Africans losing a sense of who they were, their purpose in life, and their ultimate destiny. Their history was either denied and/or grotesquely distorted beyond recognition. He suggests that the reclamation of history leads to the recovery of national pride, without which no nation can compete in the global market of ideas and products. For him, the African Renaissance is about recapturing the spaces Africans need in order to re- invent themselves, and to fashion themselves with knowledge systems and strategies which would lead them into the new millennium, as independent people, capable of providing goods and value systems worthy of their dignity. It seeks to create an ethos that will help reshape the African educational models and refocus their intellectual and emotional energies towards a more holistic vision of society. New methods of socialization would help break the stronghold of Euro-centrism and usher in an African-centred understanding of issues, because the way people think and act is a result of their socialization (Ntuli, 2002, pp.54-55). The African Renaissance calls for the examination of all thoughts and points, and the unravelling of a philosophy of division and control in a world governed by hierarchies. Drawing on these assertions, the study seeks to explore how History teachers in Kenya are able to socialize students into becoming the ‘new citizens’ that the government is seeking. The study will look at how, through teaching historical knowledge, learners are re-socialized into understanding the place of other cultures in their ways of living their lives.

Makgoba (1999) suggests that Africans are not alone in revisiting the question of their identity. Most other societies are also engaged in these debates of defining and understanding themselves. Examples include the identity and culture controversy in Britain, sparked by Nick Tate, a leading educationist, in his advocating of ‘teaching Britishness in schools’. The debate has focused on what being British means today in a multicultural Britain. In Australia, the government of Paul Keating, through national debates, worked hard towards defining a culture and identity apart from Britain. Modern Australians have realized and accepted that their identity and future are located in the Pacific and not in Europe. In Makgoba’s view, when national identity and culture are not clearly defined or articulated, societal tensions increase, leading to stunted growth in economic, educational and political sectors. For him, national culture and identity are the common thread that weaves together society and facilitates coherent development. In his view, in every society, culture influences political developments in one degree or another. Each distinct cultural heritage will result in a different political outcome. Makgoba views his thoughts as part of the process of re-

5 evaluation, reaffirmation, and redefinition, which is in keeping with the changing times, the technological revolution and a country’s interaction with other people’s knowledge, other identities and cultures. However, Goodson (1993) has questioned the hidden values of a national history in the light of the adoption of the National Curriculum in Britain in recent years. He sees it as part of a carefully constructed ideological instrument to reproduce relations of class and national power in British society, in spite of its acceptance of the notion of multicultural studies and its recognition of the “plurality of cultures” in Britain. The nation as defined by the political Right (which represents the elite and middle class) is simply one that excludes the working class, the national minorities, the Irish, and others. His comments in this regard are instructive:

Of course reasserting the primacy of the curriculum as a vehicle for the education of the elite and the custodial classes entirely fits a version of nation-building. These leadership and professional groups are precisely those who will rule and administer the nation - it is consistent to remake the curriculum in their image and reconstruct schools as mechanisms for the selection of this national meritocracy (1993, p.269).

Ideological control is ensured by fostering a sense of “mechanical obedience” to predetermined lesson objectives on the part of teachers and students (p.270). His critical questions are, which nation and by whose definition, are the different sectors in the society being treated equally? This is a concern about national history presenting a narrow, jingoistic vision of the nation – a version of “history by denial”.

In relation to the South African context, Kros and Vadi (1993) think that what is needed in the teaching of history is a fundamental reconceptualization of the historical past and not just piecemeal reform of the present curriculum. It is in the first instance, neither a question of jettisoning the more obviously racist, biased or distorted images of the past, nor of simply including topics related to nationalism. What is required is a radical reconceptualization of the History curriculum to respond to the pressures for change coming from diverse education constituencies and interest groups, as well as the social, economic, political and cultural realities of the nation.

In agreement with this viewpoint, Booth (1993) suggests in relation to Britain that history teachers should bear in mind that when choosing materials and teaching approaches for history, the topic chosen should be significant in itself or in its relation to wider issues. Equally important are the ways in which the topic chosen is presented to the learners. The teaching of history should be rooted in toleration and respect for cultural variety. Didactic teaching can easily lead to indoctrination and propaganda, whereas collaborative learning and learners’ involvement, through debates, role play and group work, can lead to a real sense of commitment to the issues they are studying and a willingness to address them in a deep and serious manner.

In Howkin’s (1989) view, relevance requires that in teaching national history the course should set up the nation as the object of study, problematize the very idea of a nation, and then examine the aspects of that problem in more detail (p.24). In learning their historical knowledge, learners need to be engaged in the debate about their nationality and the future of their national community. However, for Yael Tamir (1993), this is inadequate. Schooling should rather enhance the understanding of other people, within a local and wider context. In her view, only then can the result be reflectiveness and self-determination, as well as a non-chauvinist welcoming of national attachments on the part of those outside one’s ethnicity. The process will promote critical thinking and, subsequently, responsible action. Modiba (2003, p.54) describes this pedagogy as one that “…ends the unquestioning dependency and erases the monolithic documents that are still part of aggregate strategies often adopted for classroom work and development programmes”. She insists that it is important to note that this kind of teaching has to occur because conditions in which notions of single allegiance to an independent unitary state are becoming increasingly obsolete. As laws, trade, travel, pollution and communications come increasingly to cross old geographical boundaries, it no longer makes sense to think in terms of belonging solely to one geo-political structure or space. The point she makes can be further clarified by drawing on Slattery (1995):

Because humanity is moving to a new zone of cognition with an expanded concept of the self-in-relation… characterized by fast-changing and cyclical concepts of time with sundry cultures and main genres of expression… it seeks to transcend the ravages of modernity with a radically new concept of society, culture, language and power (1995, pp.17-19).

Featherstone (1995) argues that the process of globalization simultaneously suggests two images of culture. The first image entails the extension outwards around the globe of a particular culture. This incorporates and integrates cultures into a dominant one, which spreads throughout the world. He argues that culture had been preserved as something integrated, unified, settled and static, which is inadequate to capture in the current phase of globalization, with its nation state deformation processes. He views this image as promoting a process of conquest and unification, in which the world becomes a singular domesticated place, in which the entire population becomes assimilated into a common culture. In Featherstone’s view, global culture should not be conceived as a common culture, but as a field in which differences, power struggles and cultural prestige contests are played out.

The second image points to the compression of cultures, whereby things formally held apart are now brought into contact and juxtaposition. In this sense, a global culture is seen as a form, space or field, made possible through improved means of communication in which different cultures meet and clash. Rather than the emergence of a unified global culture, there is a tendency for the process of globalization to provide a stage for global differences. It does not seem to be providing cultural uniformity, but rather it makes one aware of new levels of diversity. Featherstone appeals

7 for a concept of culture, which can account for the displacement of other civilizations that have been at the heart of the formation of modernity, and which postcolonial theory increasingly brings to the surface. He suggests that the process demands a conception of culture that not only discovers increasing complexity in the current phase of globalization, but also looks at previous phases and their relationship to modernity. This is the stance which Kenyan History teachers are expected to adopt to educate for nation-building, as it clarifies the displacement of their civilizations by colonial education as an aspect of modernity. They have to examine texts contextually, historically and temporally, and not treat them as sacred vehicles for producing eternal truths. Texts have to be engaged with to enable reading, interpretation and criticism. Reading within a text implies the ability to identify the cultural codes that structure an author’s work and illuminate how such codes can be drawn to help students produce their own writing. This is important as it gives the students the opportunity to retell the story, to summarize it, and expand it. Interpretation means reading a text along with a variety of diverse interpretations that represent a second commentary on the text.

At issue here is the pedagogical task of helping students to analyze a text within a network of relations with other texts and institutional practices, so as to highlight the whole inter-textual system of relations that connects one text to others, a system that finally includes the student’s own writing. However, literacy and cultural critics such as Jean Franco (1989) question whether national allegory can any longer be usefully applied to a literature in which nation is a mere reminder of a vanished body. For her, the term is primarily an inevitable framework for neither political nor cultural projects.

Geertz (1973, p.17) has argued that a narrow understanding of culture occurs when it is presented as a power that occupies a privileged position on the basis of which social events, behaviours, institutions or processes are made intelligible. He views such an approach as restrictive: “… this hermetic approach to things seems … to run the danger … of locking cultural analysis away from its proper object, the informal logic of actual life. The whole point … is … to aid in gaining access to the conceptual world in which subjects live so that we can, in some extended sense of the term, converse with them”. A conception which make reality less clear and, in his view will create “a loss of orientation”, is critical to an emancipatory understanding which will stop a notion of culture as possession. People need to recognize that their real identity is bound to a culture that is infinite and is continuously compelling them to reflect on how best to act in the complex world within which they exist. He asserts that this concept of culture means that

… descriptions of Berber, Jewish or French culture must be cast in terms of the constructions we imagine Berbers, Jews or Frenchmen place upon what they live through, the formulae they use to define what happens to them. What it does not mean is that such descriptions are themselves Berber, Jewish or French – that is part of the reality they are

ostensibly describing, they are anthropological - that is part of a developing system of scientific analysis (Geertz, 1973, p.14).

Geertz (1973, p.35) is opposed to the idea of an essential human nature or an immutable cultural essence. He argues further:

The great, vast variety of differences among men, in beliefs and values, in customs and institutions, both over time and from place to place, is essentially without significance in defining his nature. It consists of mere accretions, distortions even, overlaying and obscuring what is truly human - the constant, the general, the universal - in man. … the image of a constant human nature independent of time, place, circumstance, of studies and professions, transient fashions and temporary opinions, may be an illusion, that what man is may be so entangled with where he is, who he is, and what he believes that it is inseparable from them.

The points referred to here have also been emphasized by Jenks (1995, p. 49) when he writes about culture as the practice of humankind, as its understanding. He considers culture to be a state of mind and it could thus not have a corresponding reality. Scepticism and the will to grapple with the nexus between cultural representations or codes and politics are therefore crucial for the development of a frame of mind that could make a clearer understanding of such a critical link possible.

Culture can thus be treated not as a deposit or a reflection, or a superstructural representation of a material state, it is autonomous, as it is a course of action. Cultural phenomena have a content that emerges through human intention. Certain sensations or impressions are given to us through the character of our relation to the world. We then place a form upon them by imposing a category of thought or an idea upon them…. Facts, as the elementary samples of knowing, are thus constituted in the mind. They are intentional acts which are not constant features of an orderly world universe. Experience is potentially limitless or infinite, that is, the universe is continuous in its unavailability. Confronting this, the human mind is infinite.

For meaningful education to occur, people should possess conceptions of the infinite nature of themselves as individuals, those with whom they interact, the nature of the social relations within which they are involved and subsequently, the culture they wish to promote before they can facilitate an understanding and development of the different cultural representations presented by others. The challenge for relevant and meaningful curriculum in History and Government in Kenya thus rests on how culture and ethnic differences are understood. In this country, cultural representations of the different ethnic groups are taken for granted as legitimate definitions of culture. The history classroom is viewed as consisting of a community of learners who come

9 together to define and redefine the meaning of the experience History and Government teaching. Their cultural dispositions are considered as playing an active role in the learning process.

1.2 AIM OF THE STUDY

The study aimed to explore forms of teaching used by the teachers to meet the requirements of the syllabus and its underlying philosophies and goals. Their insights had implications for teaching cultural content related to the varied ethnic groups within Kenya. The study focuses specifically on the teachers’ common sense view of this cultural content as a basis for their understanding of the concept of culture. Given that culture is infinite (Bhabha, 1994; Geertz, 1973; Gilroy, 1993; Jenkins, 1991), and continuously compelling people to reflect on how best to act, I paid particular attention to how the teachers in turn engaged their students’ common sense understanding of the perceived unique and varied ethnic groups’ cultures within Kenya, as a way of giving equal recognition and respect to cultural diversity. I explain how the syllabus was conceived, and its underlying philosophies and goals are discussed so as to identify their implications and what needs to be prioritized for teaching cultural content related to the varied ethnic groups within Kenya.

Contrary to the expectations of many policymakers, I acknowledged that there might not be a close relationship between policy ideals and the teachers’ consciousness and practice (cf. Ball, 1994). Imagining such a relationship is often informed by assumptions that understanding can be developed by simply shifting individuals’ discourses through conversations between the self and the new sets of circumstances external to the self. As a result, policies often address very little about the subjectivities which have been deeply formed from personal and national histories, or the way such subjectivities would be affected and engaged with on the basis of what a new policy promotes in an existing social context.

1.3 ASSUMPTION OF THE STUDY

The assumption in this study was that teachers would deliberately encourage the students to engage with the partial and parochial interests and views expressed about each ethnic group, by reflecting on their own in relation to the others expressed during lessons, in order to identify instances of interconnectedness. According to Ball (1994), when this is the case, interests served and notions of justice embraced are easy to realize.

The History and Government curriculum policy promotes an approach which, Santome (1996) would argue is aimed at converting classrooms into spaces where practices in society can be submitted to revision and criticism in an effort to develop skills, to reflect and to positively participate in the community. The school is considered as important in the preparation of active,

10 critical and democratic citizens. Santome argues that such an approach would only be possible where classrooms avoid settings wherein information about silent, marginal, oppressed and powerless communities is presented in a deformed manner, with superficiality, and centred in decontextualized anecdotes. In order to treat silent and marginal cultural practices appropriately, it is, in his view, necessary to revise all areas of knowledge and their contents and update them to incorporate the absent voices. Promoting this kind of cross-cultural literacy requires engaging with different cultural representations brought into the teaching/learning situation. It also considers an anthropological approach as crucial when dealing with matters of cultural diversity.

Kenya’s cultural heritage is generally considered as existing across a wide band of ethnic/tribal groups. However, this heritage was marginalized and/or neglected under British colonial rule. Policy aims to promote a form of teaching that rectifies this marginalization. It has set guidelines of what teachers need to do when they celebrating, engaging and nurturing the different cultural competences. But, the proposal of equal treatment of all 'heritages' is appropriate as an ideal but likely to be problematic to implement to realize meaningful teaching for each child (see for example Nussbaum, 1994, for discussion of this point as regards the USA; Modiba, 2003; Modiba & Van Rensburg, 2006, 2009, on South Africa).

The concept of an empowering pedagogy suggested by the History and Government curriculum policy identifies four interrelated elements which should figure strongly in teachers’ strategies. These are an understanding of the status/power of the knowledge with which they are working; the experiences of the learners; the human and material resources available to support their work; and the likely constraints of an institutional nature which might affect the activities children have to undertake. Only when teachers understand how these factors affect the way they have to teach will they be able to extend their conceptual horizons beyond the immediate cultural worlds with which they deal, recognizing the contrasts as well as the inherent similarities between them and raising questions about attitudes and assumptions in relation to representations that are different from theirs. However, important questions to ask are how teachers can do this at a level beyond the superficial and exotic? What resources do they need to ensure that whatever approach is adopted takes place within the context of the mainstream curriculum and employ methods that are consistent with the best practices required for the subject area they will be teaching at the time?

According to Hoffman (1996, 1998), a concept of culture that is derived from cultural artefacts of a people presupposes an otherness that is essentialist rather than universalist in its treatment of culture. In her view, this non-universalist view is problematic, for if culture consists of so many unique representations then one could conclude that we should have as many different forms of culture as there are representations. Hoffman (1998, p.551) argues that where the latter has been the assumption there has been no enthusiasm to grasp the complexity behind such plurality. Symbolic differences have been treated as if they reflected differences in culture. She warns

11 against such conflation because the plurality of cultural representations is not cultural pluralism. The conflation neglects the broad middle ground that lies between different cultural representations. In her view, there is a need to adopt a universalist notion of culture that can provide the real locus for cultural exploration and understanding.

Hoffman’s stance is that otherness is not finite. Cultural symbols should not be treated as a representation of some non-material state to which general individual occurrences within a group of people can be causally attributed. For her, confusing the material and non-material state when dealing with cultural matters will not promote keenness to have a deeper grasp of the complexity in the 'cultural self and other'. Instead, it encourages an understanding of culture that presupposes a category (for example, food, art, music, mode of dress, language) which usually says nothing about meanings behind such categories and the broader contexts of meanings and values in which they exist; that is, the “overarching frameworks of shared values or a worldview firmly enshrined in a privileged space called culture” (Hoffman 1996, p.550).

Reconstructing classrooms in Kenya as multiethnic democracies in the sense proposed by the History and Government curriculum policy has been emphasized by Fraser and Perry (1993). For them it implies reconstructing what it means to be a teacher:

If we see the teacher as a central participant in the construction of a new American culture, that means that the teacher must play the key role in allowing the lives, histories, and cultures of the historically oppressed to critically influence the reconceptualisation of knowledge that is represented in the curriculum and the classroom (Fraser & Perry, 1993, p.96).

This poses interesting challenges for teachers as curriculum developers. Whilst acknowledging what most scholars have argued (see, for example, Varynen, 1997), that the notion of development cannot be entirely free from Western cultural and political institutions, adopting a conception of culture that does not take into account this influence and assuming it is possible to avoid the particular emulation or rejection of Western cultural and political institutions and practices would pose serious conceptual and practical challenges for teachers who have to design curricula for effective participation within countries and outside geo-political spaces nations occupy. Even though uncomfortable, acknowledging this reality will undoubtedly make teachers more resourceful when dealing striving to design culturally responsiveness lessons. They will be able to develop curricula that

…encourage autobiographical reflection, narrative inquiry, revisionist interpretation, and contextual understanding. Knowledge will be understood as reflecting human interests, values, and actions that are socially constructed. … [and] effectively resuscitate(s) an authentic historicity. … (Slattery, 1995, pp.36-38).

Rosenholtz (quoted in Townsend, 1994, p.27) considers these issues as raising questions that are both methodological and conceptual. They are concerned not with how to measure responsive teaching but also what to measure, as well as the manner in which the school structure interrelates with its functioning and its productivity.

The questions being raised here have been dealt with quite insightfully by writers such as Appiah (1992) and Said (1993) in their respective writings on culture and imperialism and will not be addressed here. It suffices to highlight that according to them the experience of imperialism is a shared one, albeit on asymmetrical terms. Perhaps on this basis one could be allowed to argue that the culture of Kenya cannot be other than one of post-colonialism. Engaging and developing it whilst also affirming what are considered as individual heritages thus calls for a broad-based understanding of what is meant by the culture of every child and "trade-offs" to be made by the various groups within schools. The country seeks a system which acknowledges the ethnic diversity and the mutability of cultural representations within it and which is sensitive to the convergence of different ways of life and aspirations. This is a system that has to nurture a consciousness which Ladson-Billings (1995) argues is necessary for an enriched understanding of a culture that promotes engagement with the immediate realities of those taught but does not limit itself to such realities. In the words of Geertz (1973, p.17), such understanding will involve "gaining access to the conceptual world in which subjects live so that we can, in some extended sense of the term converse with them”. This is an education environment in which interaction will go beyond cultural representations or symbols, and teachers will try to connect with all learners and develop a community of learners wherein both teachers and learners are learning from one another. The study examines the strategies that teachers use to promote this cultural responsiveness.

1.4 RESEARCH QUESTION

Against the above background, the main question in this study is posed as follows:

What strategies do History teachers employ to cultivate the knowledge, skills and attitudes required for developing an inclusive Kenyan nationhood?

The question drew its rationale mainly from Young (1996), who argued that in situations where participants in discussions are differentiated by culture or social position, appeals to the common good are likely to favour the privileged and their definition of the common good. To prevent this, there is a need for procedural conditions for a minimal unity in which members of the polity are significantly interdependent and have formally equal respect for one another. There ought to be willingness to accept that all have a right to express their opinions and all ought to listen and agree on the procedural rules of fair discussion. For Young, difference is an index of structural

13 inequalities. So long as unequal circumstances persist, a politics that aims to do justice must theorize and aim to practice a form of deliberation that acknowledges difference as a reality in any public discussion striving for a common good (Young, 1997, p.399).

Far from precluding the possibility of agreement and understanding, this conception of how to engage with difference becomes a precondition for rich democratic discussion wherein difference is positively valued as a resource. By encouraging the expression of perspectives by all the various and relevant social groups on an issue, political discussion can distinguish the truer and better judgments from the rest, and produce the best solutions to collective problems and conflicts. In this case, democracy as a process of practical reason would have a normative and an epistemic function. Deliberation across different social perspectives would not only augment the available information but would also result in a transformation of the partial and parochial interests and ideas associated with each difference into a more reflective and objective judgment. Through communicative democracy, judgment is made not from a neutral point of view that transcends particular perspectives, but from an understanding of one’s own perspective in relation to others in a wider context, and, consequently broadens knowledge of oneself by expressing, questioning and challenging differently situated knowledge.

The following sub-questions helped me to look closely at the teachers’ understanding of the History curriculum policy:

 How did teachers identify important key concepts implied by lesson objectives, and what kind of strategies did they devise to address these key concepts?

The expectation was that the strategies they chose to use in their lessons would first demonstrate how they understood what needed to be done to re-contextualize the key concepts they taught, and, second, how they used the evidence of the learning that occurred to reinforce or, if learning problems were evident, provide a further understanding of the concepts.

 How did teachers deal with historical content that is viewed as Kenyan but is also claimed by other ethnic groups outside the country?

It was important to determine how teachers managed the perceptions about national heritage between themselves and learners and among learners themselves. I considered the enactment of their roles as a reflection of how they perceived what the curriculum policy proposed as ways of fostering a national identity and unity by teaching History in secondary schools.

 How is the Kenyan or African content used as a basis to read, criticize and interpret what students took for granted as their exclusive context, history and reality?

Teachers had to explain how their teaching positioned students to reflect on cultural content and draw on the insights gained to justify the interconnectedness of the ethnic groups within Kenya.

For their strategies to be meaningful or relevant to policy, they had to re-contextualize (Bernstein, 1975) appropriately by subjecting taken-for-granted or common-sense understandings of the perceived varied cultures to reflection and judgment that clarified their interconnectedness and drew on this concept to help strengthen the students’ sense of being Kenyan.

According to Berger and Luckman (1976), institutionalization has a historical dimension to it. As they assert:

Institutions always have a history of which they are products. It is impossible to understand an institution adequately without an understanding of the historical process in which it was produced (1976, p.72).

Drawing on this view, the study assumed that it is only when learners understand that all cultural heritages are a result of institutionalization that they can engage the multiple references that constitute different cultural codes, experiences and languages. They will be able to read these codes historically and critically and learn their limits, especially those used to construct their own narratives and histories. As cultural symbolic forms, as Thompson (1990) argues, these are expressions of a subject and for a subject (or subjects). They are produced, constructed or employed by a subject who, in so doing, is pursuing certain aims or purposes, and seeking to express him or herself for others. These others, in receiving and interpreting the symbolic form, perceive it as the expression of a subject, and as a message to be understood (ibid., p.138). Symbolic forms in this study would be the teachers’ and students’ utterances, actions and interpretations of the world around them, taken for granted as their own or those of others.

Implicit here is Gramsci’s (1971) notion of common sense, which he describes as “… the uncritical and largely unconscious way in which a person perceives the world” (1971, p.63). Failure to challenge this might result in its remaining the basis of the way people behave, even when faced with a language of another culture or ideology. Culture in this case would be the ways of thinking and the practices characteristic of a particular group. These perceptions may not be the correct way of thinking but they are solid and inform norms of conduct, therefore they cannot be reconstructed without challenging what people see as common sense. For this reason, he suggests that if there is to be consistency between the way people think and the way they act in particular situations, they have to be exposed to principles that would guide their actions in accordance with what the ideology expects. This would constitute the good sense that should influence decisions on actions that would be deemed appropriate for particular cultural or ideological circumstances.

In Gramsci’s view “… the task necessary to bring forth change… would be to base one’s strategy on the common sense of the people, from that folklore shape it to a more refined, or thought- through and in a sense principled world view” (ibid., p.78). Challenging common sense should bring about cultural formation and also help develop critical thinking that is essential to a particular

15 ideology. For this to happen it is important to take personal experiences as a starting point. His view is that people generally have a certain intellectual and cultural level that needs critical preparation for them to be able to adopt the characteristics of the ideology to which they are being exposed. He sees such adoption as bringing about an “intellectual revolution”, and further asserts that “it is not just the ideas that require to be confronted but the social forces behind them and, more directly, the ideology these forces have generated” (ibid., p.321). With exposure to ways of renovating and being critical of an already existing experience comes an ability to reflect on taken- for-granted cultural or ideological circumstances and develops what Gramsci described as praxis, that is “… the central nexus …the point at which it [action] becomes actual and lives historically (that is socially and no longer just in the brains of individuals), when it ceases to be arbitrary and becomes necessary - rational - real” (ibid., p.369).

Developing good sense or intellectual growth in people is a process that involves internalising ways of thinking, acting and imagining within a culture or ideology. Therefore, the adoption of a required culture or ideology means developing a particular consciousness. Challenging common sense, according to Gramsci, involves changing taken-for-granted perceptions that influence the way people think, failure to do which might result in common sense remaining the basis of the way people behave, even when faced with a language of another culture or ideology. Culture in this case would be the ways of thinking and the practices characteristic of a particular group. For this reason, he considers it important to create ideological hegemony, if there was to be consistency between the way people think and the way they are to act in particular situations. Such a process would ensure that people are exposed to principles that would guide their actions in accordance with what the ideology expects them to do. His point is that good sense should influence decisions on actions that would be deemed appropriate for particular cultural or ideological circumstances.

Developing good sense in people is not a question of introducing a new way of thinking, but is about renovating and reconstructing existing perceptions that inform the way people act, that is, exposing them to “…a new culture and new philosophy which will be rooted in the popular consciousness with the same solidity and imperative as traditional believes” (ibid., p.424). In short, the intensity of the intellectual revolution should create a ‘specialized’ culture by encouraging a way of thinking that is superior to common sense, and the ‘specialized’ culture will inform the way people act.

Also, according to Habermas (1984), an understanding of what is to be done and the reasons for doing it informs proper judgment and is achieved when people do not just follow instructions and prescriptions blindly, but use language and/or other forms of communication to facilitate mutual understanding of the ends and means that would be critical to a plan of action. In his view, it is only when actors understand each other and co-ordinate their actions to pursue shared goals that proper judgement is possible.

1.5 RATIONALE OF THE STUDY

In Kenya there is, in general, limited research into the different aspects of curriculum policy implementation. That research which has been carried out is mainly concerned with how history can enhance an appreciation of the cultural heritage of the nation, foster national unity, moral integrity and mutual social responsibility, as a way of promoting a holistic development of the individual, use Kiswahili for integrating and promoting East African unity and for inculcating patriotism and cultural identity (Scotton, 1978; East African Community Secretariat, 2004). In general, these studies seem to overlook the critical role that teachers can or not play in fulfilling this national and regional aspiration. Recently Modiba and Odhiambo (2007) reported on a study they conducted into how teachers in Kenya were teaching History to promote nationhood, followed in 2009 by publication of another study in which they highlight the conceptual challenges the teachers are facing when interpreting the objectives of the syllabus introduced in 2000.

Working as a History teacher in various schools within Kenya, I noticed that we generally did not reflect on the essence of the curriculum objectives, but rather took it for granted that knowledge of the various ethnic cultural expressions and rituals would help the students interested in knowing more about other ethnic groups, realize what is common and different amongst them and subsequently become curious to explore the origins of such commonalities and differences. The disposition, in my view, was caused by lack of a critical stance towards policy and with exposure to further study, in particular, of a course on the meaning of Culturally Relevant Pedagogy at honours level and Curriculum Theory at MEd. level made me uncomfortable. My exposure to amongst other, cultural studies writings (Geertz; Jenks; Appia; Bhabha; Gilroy; Giroux; Held; Welsh; Taylor) and curriculum theory writings (Hirst; Pinar et al.; Slattery; Hargreaves; Gough; Kelly), that emphasize the significance of conceptual understanding as an important element of an empowering curriculum, made me concerned about the quality of education to which students in secondary schools in Kenya were exposed. However, whenever I had to challenge my colleagues I faced a dilemma since there were no empirical studies to which I could refer in order to justify my criticisms. I understood for the first time, after reading Gramsci’s work, why it was difficult for my colleagues to teach in a manner that was not routine or commonsensical to them.

Pedagogy as a critical cultural practice needs to open up new institutional spaces in which students can experience and define what it means to be cultural producers capable of both reading different texts and producing them, of moving in and out of theoretical discourses but never losing sight of the need to theorize for themselves. The role of history, therefore, will be to enable learners to understand who they are in relation to others, viewed differently in a broader socio-economic context. This means that pedagogy needs to go beyond a call for configuring the curriculum so as

17 to include new information. When this is the case, rather than images reconfiguring reality into simply another text, they become central to revealing the structures of power relations within texts and how they work in society and the larger global order (Trend, 1996). Therefore, a politics that makes the relationship among authority, ethics, and power central to its teaching expands rather than closes down the possibilities of a deliberative democratic society. This would be a society which addresses, amongst other things, the questions of inequality and power.

For a positive national/cultural identity to be nurtured, students should not only understand the meaning of their cultural structures, actions and other artefacts, but also understand their own and others’ positions within and without the social, economic, political and cultural contexts. They should be able to view themselves in relation to what they identify as “others” in and outside their context, in short, be able to speak across difference and critique themselves and others. More so, they should not only be able to understand their own culture and that of others, but should also be able to identify the attributes of each other’s culture and employ the commonly cherished values as a basis of a positive identity.

National history is not a matter of falsifying or distorting the past, but rather of rescuing from oblivion aspects of that past. In relation to South Africa, Bam and Visser (1996) assert that, through the learning of history, students can be prepared to become effective citizens in a democratic society. In their view, students do need to be accustomed to skills related to learning history which are essential for meaningful participation in a democratic society.

We would argue strongly that for our new democracy to be effective, we need citizens with critical and reflective thinking abilities. We believe that the history classroom is the ideal place to develop these skills (1996, pp.93-94).

This insight raised interesting questions, which I wished to pursue through further postgraduate study, for instance: how did teachers’ understanding of policy help them or not when teaching History to promote national identity and unity? In case they functioned simply on the basis of common sense, or what were traditional ways of viewing cultural heritage, what was missing to encourage the adoption of a critical stance towards such heritage, so that the principles and concepts underpinning the notion of nationhood that Kenya aspires for herself is not distorted by their teaching? In short, what kind of understanding did teachers require as a more effective basis for choosing appropriate teaching strategies for the objectives stipulated in the History syllabus for secondary schools?

For the purposes of this study, it was only when the educational conditions that Gutmann (1987) writes about are present to ensure that citizens are able to engage in “conscious social reproduction that Kenya could as a society... support conscious social reproduction [and] educate all educable children to be capable of participating in collectively shaping their society” (p.39). Such conditions

18 will promote a ‘democratization’ of education and society by foregrounding a conception of education which recognizes that without participation in the shaping of society, a democratic system of education was unattainable. Democratic classroom practice had to demonstrate how democratic participation in educational decision–making could be facilitated by conditions designed to preserve and protect the democratic values and educational aims that policy was intended to foster and promote.

According to Held (1987), what is required for the creation of such conditions are principled restrictions that can function to promote democratic legitimacy to educational decisions, otherwise the opportunities for citizens to receive education that is pre-supposed and required by democratic deliberation would be curtailed. Democratic classroom practice must therefore not limit democratic decision–making or prevent educational decisions that would prevent the next generation of citizens from acquiring the knowledge, virtues and dispositions that participation in the process of conscious social reproduction requires (ibid., pp.280-283).

This view has implications for successful policy implementation. It emphasizes a conception of policy implementation that Ball (1994, p.23) writes about as follows:

… struggle, dispute, conflict and adjustment take place over a pre-established terrain… there are struggles over the interpretation and enactment of policies. … and only certain voices can be heard as meaningful and authoritative.

Albeit, policy cannot be understood as simply reflecting a conception that only represents interests of an existing power, it also has to help create this conception in what is often a precarious and vulnerable terrain. Therefore, to assert any kind of social order would involve a displacement of an understanding that would be in contradiction to the ideals and power promoted by policy. However, if these ideals and power are considered rational, less power would be constitutive of social relations and power will be constituted in ways that are more compatible with inclusive values.

According to Ball (1994), policy projects images of what is conceived as ideal in a society. Consequently, it cannot be understood in isolation from the interests, conflicts, forms of domination and notions of justice it implies in practice. These factors manifest themselves structurally, interactively and discursively in a social context. In education they are reflected by the levels of funding, forms of governance and ways of conceiving and implementing policy at a micro-level. It is in this sense that Bell sees policy as a representation which is encoded in complex ways through struggles, compromises, authoritative public interpretations and reinterpretations, and also decoded through actors’ interpretations and meanings in relation to their history, experiences, skills, resources and social context. Because policies are concerned with the authoritative allocation of values, trying to understand should involve establishing whose ideals

19 and interests have been prioritized in policymaking and whose have not. Therefore, understanding policy will reveal where power and control resides within a social context. On the basis of this view, the study was conducted to establish how teachers’ strategies served as stimuli to understand the partiality of ethnic identity. I considered this as a necessary resource to encourage learners’ involvement in the cognitive growth that could promote national unity.

A new curriculum policy had been introduced but its implementation had not been studied. I decided to make a contribution in this regard through pursuing a doctoral study that would look at teaching strategies at classroom level to explore how they were or were not in line with the intentions of the syllabus. With the professional education the majority of these teachers received, they were assumed to possess adequate professional understanding and knowledge to devise strategies that promoted classroom interaction that would serve government’s objectives of teaching History. The hope was that data that clarified the nature and scope of these interactions could enlighten and help curriculum planners make informed decisions, aimed at improving the professional support programmes, if required, to further re-skill teachers for the effective implementation of the syllabus. In a much more modest sense, the study sought to provide the basis for a relevant model of in-service training.

Young (1996) has highlighted the importance of democratic communication when having to listen and appreciate the claims of others. She asserts that understanding is reached not by transcending what divides and differentiates, but by speaking across differences to learn the partiality of one’s own perspective, to frame one’s claims in terms of appeals to justice, and to expand one’s social knowledge by expressing, questioning and challenging differently situated knowledge. For her, coming to appreciate other people’s point of view is closely linked with a willingness to transform one’s own preferences:

Unlike the interest-based conception of democracy, communicative democracy emphasizes that people’s ideas about political questions often change when they interact with other people’s ideas and experience… (1996, p.126).

Deliberation across different social perspectives is meant not only to augment the available information, but also to result in a transformation of the partial and parochial interests and ideas of each into more reflective judgment. For Young, judgment is not made from a neutral point of view transcending particular perspectives, but from an understanding of one’s own perspective in relation to others in a wider context. It involves for her a reflective stance that is not merely self- regarding but also aimed at understanding the views of others who are positioned differently:

... through listening across difference to each position they can come to understand something about the ways proposals and claims affect others differently situated. By internalising this mediated understanding of plural positions to some extent, participants

gain a wider picture of the social process in which their own partial experience is embedded. This greater social objectivity increases their wisdom for arriving at just solutions to collective problems (1996, p.128).

Central to the above assertion is that the participants must be active in the process of decision- making as well as its execution. Such a democratic structure provides suitable conditions for the self-development of individuals. However, Young asserts that this does not call for the agency of an isolated individual considered outside of any social context, but is rather the exercise of this power in free association with the agency of others. The purpose of this association is to arrive at joint decisions and joint actions concerning matters of common interest and needs.

The presupposition is that people are equally agential. As human beings, they each have an equal right to participate in the codetermination of those actions in which they are jointly engaged. It calls for different traits of character, the first being rational initiative. Therefore, for an individual to participate actively, he/she requires reasons for acting and self-understanding. The second trait involves an ability to understand the perspective of others, which calls for a reciprocity of perspectives beyond the limits of one’s own view and makes possible the establishment of a shared point of view as well as an explicit understanding of differences in point of view. It connotes openness to alternative arguments and views and calls for the recognition by an individual of the others with whom he/she is associated as equal agent. Such recognition would include respect for others as individuals with purposes of their own and respect for their rights, where these include basic equal rights as human beings and specific rights within a given institutional structure. It calls for tolerance, flexibility, open-mindedness, commitment and responsibility. The study assumed that, as principle agents at classroom level, teachers needed to have demonstrated sufficient understanding of the concepts underpinning the objectives of the syllabus to enable them to translate them into learning materials and activities relevant to the cognitive development students required to contribute to the hoped for nationhood and unity. This would be a development characterized by what Rawls (1996) calls the sense of justice:

A sense of justice is the capacity to understand, to apply, and to act from the public conception of justice which characterizes the fair terms of social cooperation. Given the nature of political conception as specifying a public basis of justification, a sense of justice also expresses a willingness, if not the desire, to act in relation to others, on terms that they also can publicly endorse (1996, p.19).

From Rawls’ viewpoint, justice as fairness starts from within a certain political tradition and takes as its fundamental idea that of society as a fair system of cooperation over time, from one generation to the next. As he points out, this can only develop where citizens are perceived as free and equal, within a society regulated by a political conception of justice. According to Carr and

Hartnett (1996), this conception of democracy is grounded in a way of life in which all individuals can develop their distinctively human qualities and capacities. It envisages a society which is itself intrinsically educative, a “learning society”, in which political socialization is a distinctively educational process. In their view, in such a society the primary aim of education is to initiate individuals into the values, attitudes and modes of behaviour appropriate to democratic citizenship and conducive to active participation in democratic institutions. Education will thus seek to empower its future members to participate collectively in the process through which their society is being shaped and reproduced. They further assert that the task of cultivating in pupils the knowledge, skills and attitudes necessary for public participation requires a curriculum which fosters those forms of critical and explanatory knowledge, and which allows pupils to reappraise existing norms and reflect critically on social, political and economic institutions in contemporary society. Pedagogically, it requires participatory rather than instructional teaching methods in order to cultivate the skills and attitudes which democratic deliberation requires (cf. p.43-44).

Where there is concern for democratic deliberation, discussion becomes important, and moral principles for all learners should not be neglected. Similar opportunities need to be available to all within an education system, for example, through the promotion of values requisite to maximising the attainment of desirable outcomes. Richard Peters (1979) described these values:

Democracy is a way of life in which matters of policy are resolved wherever possible by discussion…. To decide things by discussion requires truth telling, respect for persons and the impartial consideration of interests as underlying moral principles… If these are to be more than a formal façade that can be manipulated by interest groups… a concern for the common good is also required to encourage widespread participation in public life. This suggests a revival of the almost forgotten ideal of fraternity… to vitalize public projects as well as the ability to discuss and criticize public policy (p.463).

According to Peters, the primary aim of education should be the promotion of participation based on virtues such as tolerance, integrity, truth-telling, impartiality, fraternity and the use of critical reason – virtues without which ‘conscious social reproduction’ would be impossible and which are fundamental principles of the democratic way of life. In his view, a democratic society must therefore be committed to fostering a form of education that can enable individuals to acquire a general knowledge of how the political system works and be sensitive to the social and economic conditions that it has shaped and by which it is shaped. It involves the kinds of knowledge and understanding that all members of a democracy should possess in order to participate in that form of life and the skills necessary to participate in public affairs (cf. p. 463). As a result, in the effort to achieve this, students have to be exposed to teaching strategies that encourage the practice of these virtues before they are expected to enact them voluntarily.

However, theorists of radical democracy argue that the theoretical position embodies an inclusionary impulse that needs to be problematized. Inclusion politics must account for the ways that inclusion can still oppress or fail to alter structures of domination. Their argument is that in many liberal democratic societies, subordinated groups have been included by being accorded such formal rights as the one to vote. As a result, inclusionary attempts often reaffirm a hegemonic core to which the margins are added without any significant destabilization of that core, or continue to valorize the very centre that is problematic to begin with.

The conceptual logic guiding gestures to include must, therefore, be interrogated in order to grapple with oppression in the form of appropriation, commodification, fetishization, and exoticization. Since liberal discourses and their encouragement of inclusion politics do not adequately theorize oppressive inclusion and tend to interpret inclusion as a sign of fairness or equality, they, in the views of these theorists, miss how the other can be included to actually craft a hegemonic self. They, in turn, ignore that the liberal self always needs and is often manufactured in opposition to the other, the excluded. For example, Mouffe (2000) argues for a radicalized democracy that is able to account for cultural differences in ways that other liberal democracies do not, especially when they retain liberal conceptions of difference. What is important for her is the hegemony of democratic values that emphasize practices to promote a view of citizenship that is adequate for multi-ethnic and multi-cultural societies. In her view, cultural difference in liberal discourses of multiculturalism or pluralism frequently means a simple compatible plurality with no conflict, contestation, or contradictions.

To deal with difference, Mouffe (2000) envisages reworking citizenship into a type of political identity responsive to the demands of a variety of movements that ensure the achievement of equality and freedom for all, with equal access not only to the material resources necessary for self-development but also to meaningful participation in social, cultural, political and economic decision-making. State structures and social formations would require a profound redistribution of power and a complete dismantling of institutionalized inequality reflected through capitalist exploitation, sexism, ethnicity and racism.

Even though there is a need for various forms of political solidarity, the imposition of the wrong kinds of unity can limit the democratic potential of the social movements to achieve unity and preserve autonomy. Therefore, it is only by conceptualizing unity in terms of hegemonic articulation that the goal of unifying different movements becomes compatible with the goal of preserving their autonomy.

In as much as a struggle may emerge, its philosophy, programme, tactics, and very identity would be reshaped in the democratic process of mutual education with the others. This process could not therefore be characterized as the formation of the coalition between pre-constituted interest groups,

23 but rather would take the form of continuous negotiations that give rise to new hybrid identities and temporary blocs.

Pluralism is radical only to the extent that each term of this plurality finds within itself the principle of its own validity, without this having to be sought in a transcendent or underlying positive ground for the hierarchy of meaning of them all and the source and guarantee of their legitimacy. And this radical pluralism is democratic to the extent that the autoconstitutivity of each one of its terms is the result of displacements of the egalitarian imaginary (Mouffe, 2000, p.167).

The diversity among democratic differences must be affirmed as a good in itself, and genuine tolerance mean that minority groups are granted access to the material resources they need to preserve their rights and to promote their distinct democratic differences. Genuine multiculturalism must mean not only the addition of minority democratic values, but also the opening up of the values held by the majority to the minorities’ democratic critique, and the construction of a new set of shared community values through negotiations. Progressive struggles must be united to the extent that they reshape their identities with respect to the others’ demands. The point being made here is that radical democratic pluralist theory can provide the tools that would allow democratic activists who are engaged in the struggles against capitalist exploitation, sexism, racism and homophobia to map out the context of those struggles, namely the given configurations of power relations.

From Laclau and Mouffe’s (1985) perspective, a fully constructivist theory of identity formation must go much further than those that merely recognize that political discourse can affect the formation of interests or that it can play a secondary role in the reproduction of social structures. For these authors, discourse is prior to identity formation in the sense that identity is wholly constructed through discourse. They reject the assumption that individuals freely choose their identity and freely utilize socio-economic networks and institutions to shape their material conditions according to their preferences. It is only through political discourses that individuals are able to experience the ways in which they are positioned within the social structures.

Consequently, radical democracy values citizenship as an identity that is central to the promotion of radical democratic pluralism. However, citizenship in this case is not imposed as the pre- constituted type of solidarity that would determine all other identities. Instead, individuals are expected to be free to pursue their individual goods in their various spheres of interest, albeit they should also develop a minimal common political identity through their participation in the public debates in which shared political norms and rules are constructed. The democratic principles of equality and liberty are in this sense a peculiar type of common good as they constitute the only common good that can be upheld without contradicting genuine rights to individual liberty and

24 pluralist self-determination. In these terms, citizens should be bound together by a collective identification with a radical democratic interpretation of the principles of liberty and equality, for it is the democratic tradition that binds together differences in modern society. With this approach the citizen is no longer the passive recipient of rights whose freedom resides in the sphere in which the sovereign remains silent. Furthermore, citizenship becomes the articulating principle through which the links between each individual’s diverse memberships and the links between individuals and micro-communities are mediated. As an articulation, the constitutive logic works in all directions. Citizenship shapes other memberships but is in turn shaped by them as well. Again, it is only when the conception of the social agent as pre-constituted and fixed is displaced, and the social agent is conceived as the articulation of an ensemble of subject positions, constructed within specific discourses and always precariously and temporarily sutured at the intersection of those subject positions, that such an approach to citizenship becomes thinkable (Laclau & Mouffe, 1992, 1993).

In Giroux’s (1998) terms, this calls for schools to redefine their curricula within a conception of culture and identity that is linked to the diverse and changing global conditions. The redefinition necessitates new forms of literacy, a vastly expanded understanding of how power works within cultural apparatuses, and a keener sense of how the existing generation of youth are being produced within societies. What teachers need to do is to address both the conditions through which they teach and what it means to learn from a generation that is experiencing life in a way vastly different from the representations offered in a Euro-centric version of schooling. Now that the terms of identity and the production of new maps of meaning must be understood within new cultural practices, inscribed in relations of power that intersect differently with race, class, gender, and sexual orientation, culture and identity must be understood in terms of the context of the struggles and the shared language of resistance that points to hope and possibility within it. For Giroux and McLaren (1989) this shared language should be as they claim:

One that is theoretically rigorous, publicly accessible, and ethically grounded; called for is a language which refuses to reconcile schooling with inequality, which actively abandons those forms of pedagogical silencing which prevent us from becoming aware of and offended by the structures of oppression at work in both institutional and everyday life. We need a language that reconstructs schooling as a form of cultural politics that links the construction of school knowledge to the concern of everyday culture, that redefines the language of reform in unequivocal terms, and that situates the debate over education as part of a wider struggle for democracy itself (1989, p.xxii).

At the time the study was conducted, South Africa had just completed the first decade of transition to democracy. Since the language of promoting national identity through the History curriculum (cf. Guyver, 2009) in that country was very similar to what had been advocated in Kenya, findings

25 in this study were also considered as providing for the beginnings of comparative educational research work involving the two countries and the AU and the broader Southern African Development Community (SADC).

1.6 RESEARCH DESIGN

This study followed a basic interpretive qualitative research design, enabling me to understand and explain the meaning of Form One History lessons with as little disruption of the natural setting as possible. As a design whose key philosophical assumption is that reality is constructed by individuals interacting within their social worlds, adopting it meant that I would be concerned directly with these lessons as they were manifested, experienced and understood by the teachers. The assumption was that their meaning was embedded in their experiences and that this meaning was mediated through perceptions (Merriam, 1998, 2002). Exploring them as unique to Kenyan History teachers working in schools within in a specific province (as a bounded system), Yin (2009) was useful to understanding the implementation of the History syllabus introduced in 2000.

Being sensitive to the interventionist nature of classroom observations as the only ways of capturing teachers’ classroom practices, and their likely impact on the integrity of the data to be collected, to minimize such impact teachers had to be given an opportunity to ‘talk’ and explain their reasons for using specific materials and interactions during their lessons. Communication about the observed lessons had to reveal how they related their performance to the requirements of the objectives they had to translate into lessons. Their explanations were important in interpreting data collected from observations, making it possible to identify teachers’ taken-for-granted views about the objectives of the syllabus they had to teach.

The basic qualitative approach (Feagin, Orum & Sjorberg, 1991; Merriam, 2002) made it possible for me to conduct a holistic and in-depth investigation. Thick descriptions of the teachers’ classroom strategies were obtained from studying their uninterrupted teaching in the natural setting of their daily work in class. From uninfluenced classroom practices it was possible first to capture how they engaged with historical content in the textbooks and what learners considered and expressed as their cultural heritage. Second, the methodology was useful to probe and prompt them to account for their practices and provide their understanding of the objectives stated in the syllabus and rationale for their teaching strategies. The data was invaluable to the conclusions that are drawn in the study about the appropriateness of their strategies to the aims of teaching History at school level in Kenya.

Data collected through observations and interviews made it possible to describe, interpret and explain classroom interactions. The methods also enabled me to record the intended and unintended consequences of observed interaction patterns in the relationships among teachers and

26 students. A pilot study was carried out between September and November 2005, in two provincial government schools, both situated in Nairobi Province. The main study involved (n=14) History teachers from 9 provincial secondary schools situated in the Nairobi province in Kenya. (n=34) classroom observations and interviews were carried out between March and December 2006.

1.7 DATA MANAGEMENT AND ANALYSIS

In all stages, collected data was transcribed and filed in the computer, to be used when needed. I made handwritten transcriptions of all collected data before typing them onto the computer. As Patton (2002) explains, when a researcher does his or her transcriptions of data, it

provides an opportunity to get immersed in the data, an experience that usually generates emergent insights. Typing and organizing handwritten field notes offer another opportunity to immerse yourself in the data in the transition between fieldwork and full analysis, a chance to get a feel for the cumulative data as a whole. Doing your own transcriptions, or at least checking them by listening to the tapes as you read them, can be quite different from just working off transcripts done by someone else (Patton, 2002, p.441).

The process began during the data collection phase (cf. Rubin & Rubin, 1995; Vithal & Jansen, 1997). As data was scanned and cleaned, subtle nuances were captured and inconsistencies and irrelevant detail exposed. Using what Patton (2000) refers to as ‘open coding’, data was broken down, examined, compiled, conceptualized and categorized. Through ‘fracturing’ and re-arranging it into categories that facilitated categorization within and amongst schools, its subjective consolidation and interpretation occurred through a process of systematic classification of coding and theme identification (Hsieh & Shannon, 2005; Merriam, 1998). The process facilitated correlation and identification of differences in the data, and thus enabled me to integrate emergent themes and sub-themes into a descriptive account that made a detailed, valid and reliable (though subtle) interpretation. The analysis provided insights that clarify how the teachers understood the kind of teaching strategies likely to make accessible to students a concept of difference embodying a historical continuity that maintains solidarity among populations of states. It would enable them to see their specific cultural representations and positions as part of a complex hybrid culture (cf. Castell, 1997).

1.8 ORGANIZATION OF THE STUDY

The study was organized as follows.

Chapter 1 contains a background of the study, with Kenyan education policy on History outlined to clarify the aims of teaching the subject. The chapter also gives an account of how the secondary

27 school History curriculum is organized, the aim of the study, research questions, assumption and the rationale, preliminary literature and design.

The argument presented in Chapter 2 is that any attempt to understand nationhood has to acknowledge that it is not an objective reality but a state of consciousness. The feeling of belonging to a national group is as atavistic as changes in time and space. For this reason, it is a subject that generates ambivalence. In one sense, nationhood has been a product of nationalist mobilisation that gave different people of the world the urge to build states and promote social and political integration, as was the case in the New World. It is in this sense that the perceived uniqueness of a people should be seen less as insular and more related to particular historical developments. It is not enough simply to take heed of, for example, the institutionalized cultural representations of a group of people without at the same time giving attention to their transformation over time. Important to consider are the specificities of social change and, in particular, how citizens as social actors within states play out nationhood in complex ways over time. This chapter argues that a useful analysis of nationhood, in a postcolonial East African country, can thus not be limited to an identity or culturally-related malaise. Special attention is paid to contradictions likely to be experienced in promoting or enacting the envisaged nationhood because of the tensions between national and global imperatives, that is, reconciling local and global aspirations. Challenges to achieving nationhood are reflected upon on the basis of the definition of culture that ought to be promoted within the country.

Chapter 3 highlights the role of history as a school subject. By distinguishing it from History as an academic discipline, the knowledge and skills emphasized by each are looked at critically in order to clearly define what schools need to focus on when teaching it.

Chapter 4 Examines the notion of Nationhood by focussing, in particular, on how it has been informed by modernism and globalisation. By looking at the ways citizenship education has been used as a tool to promote nationhood, an attempt is made to clarify the possible challenges in meeting the requirements of nationhood through citizenship education.

Chapter 5 explores the concept of globalization in terms of cultural homogenization and heterogenization.

Chapter 6 explores democratic deliberation as a basis for understanding the self and the other.

Chapter 7 explains the research design, discussing the approach, methods, sampling process and research tools used for collecting and analysing data in both the pilot and main study.

Findings in Chapters 8 and 9 are summarized in Chapter 10, with reflection on the literature and research design. Finally, on the basis of this discussion, the chapter will draw conclusions and

28 make recommendations for future curriculum work on history teaching as a basis for national identity and development in Kenya.

CHAPTER 2

THE CONCEPT OF NATIONHOOD IN KENYA: ITS CONTEXT AND CONCEPTUAL IMPLICATIONS

2.1 INTRODUCTION

In Kenya, the concept of nationhood became important at the time of political independence. The country needed a committed and responsible citizenry exposed to the virtues of national identity and unity to replace the strong affiliations based on ethnicity that hitherto existed. Forging a national consciousness had to minimize the impact of ethnicity in people’s minds, to enable them to utilize their varied talents for the enrichment of the nation as a unitary whole. One aspect thought to be crucial in achieving national unity was a language that could help unify the 44 ethnic communities that constituted the three main language groups in the country. The next section gives an overview of the constitution of the groups.

2.2 LANGUAGE GROUPS IN KENYA

The Bantu constitute the largest language group of people in Kenya, with three sub-groups: Western Bantu, Central Bantu and the Eastern or Coastal Bantu.

The Western Bantu are made up of communities that settled in the western part of Kenya, and include the Abaluhyia, Abagusii, Abakuria and Abasuba. The Central Bantu consist of communities that settled in the central parts of Kenya, namely the Agikuyu, Ameru, Aembu, Ambeere and Akamba. The Coastal Bantu consist of communities that settled in areas near the Kenyan coast, namely the Wadawida (Taita), Wataveta, Wapokomo, Waswahili and Miji kenda. The Miji kenda are sub-divided into nine groups, namely the Wagiriama, Warabai, Wakambe, Waribe, Wadigo, Wanduruma, Wachoyi, Wakauma and Wajibana.

The Nilotes comprise three main groups: i) the River-lake Nilotes, who are the Luos who settled in Nyanza Province; ii) the plain Nilotes, who consist of the Turkana, Samburu, IIchamus (Jemps) El molo, Suk, and IIdoris; and iii) the highland Nilotes, who consist of the Maasai and Kalenjin speakers, namely the Kipsigis, Nandi, Tugen, Keiyo, Marakwet, Saboat, Pokot and Terikh.

The Cushitic speakers are represented linguistically by the Mbugu of Usambara; the Dahalo (or Sanye) of lower Tana; the Boni, who were between the lower Tana; and the Juba and the Iraqw group that includes the Goroma, Burungi, Alagwa, and Qwadza who are also found in Tanzania.

The remainder of Kenya’s population consist of Arabs, Europeans and Asians. The Kenyan Arabs are the descendants of Arabs and Persian migrants, also known as the Swahili. The Asian community are largely descended from the indentured labourers brought in to build the railway line, and who settled in Kenya when their contracts expired. The Asian populace today is largely Indian, with a small mixture of East Asians, mostly Chinese (Ogot & Ochieng, 1995).

The freezing of zones of confluence between the various ethnic groups by the British changed forms of interaction amongst them. By discouraging inter-ethnic rural migration and interaction, rural districts such as the Samburu, Turkana and the Masaai reserves were closed throughout most of the colonial period. As a result, various ethnic communities were kept apart and treated each other with suspicion and prejudice. Also, seeds of Christianity were easily sown where ethnic and inter-ethnic relations were strained, because different denominational orientations could appropriate for themselves different ethnic zones of influence. The Western province became predominantly Anglican and Ukambani Catholic; the Central Province Presbyterian and Kissi; and South Nyanza Seventh Day Adventist. (Ogot & Ochieng, 1995)

Ethnic divisions were worsened by a colonial education policy that insisted on formal Christian instructions being conducted only in African languages. Careers were also restricted to a few trajectories such as the church, teaching and working in the agricultural or veterinary fields to ensure that the graduates would return to their ‘tribal’ areas to serve their own ethnic groups. As a result, it is still very difficult to find, for example, a Kikuyu Agricultural Officer working among the rural Luhya population or vice versa. (Ogot & Ochieng, 1995)

Colonial policy deliberately encouraged ethnic associations that resulted in political organizations, for example, the Kikuyu Central Association, Ukambai Members’ Association, Young Kavirondo Association for the Luhya and luo, Kalenjin Political Alliance, Mwambao United Front and the Taita Hills Association. As a result, at the dawn of independence, when government structures were formed, these ethnic divisions could not be avoided. They found a congenial environment amongst the communities that were inward looking, prejudiced, suspicious and hostile towards each other. To counteract the influence of such an environment, Harambee was promoted to promote decolonization and support national unity. “I” is a Bantu word that translates as “let us all pull together”, used to encourage Kenyans to give their best in order to complete any task at hand for the benefit of the community. It is used in discussions of economic and social development when emphasising the need for mutual assistance, joint effort, social responsibility and self- reliance. Its equivalents are “Ujamaa” in Tanzania and “humanism” in Zambia. (Ogot & Ochieng, 1995)

2.3 HARAMBEE

The Harambee philosophy came to articulate the translation of political aspirations of the populace into tangible benefits. It is associated with Kenyatta who in one of his speeches on June 1st 1963 said:

....as we participate in the pomp and circumstance, and as we make merry at this time, remember this, we are relaxing before the tall that is to come. We must work harder to fight our enemies... ignorance, sickness and poverty. Therefore, I give you the call HARAMBEE. Let us all work harder together for our country, Kenya.

He later reiterated the need for co-operative effort for a successful Kenya as follows:

...our motto Harambee was conceived in the realization of the challenge of national building that now lies ahead of us. It was conceived in the knowledge that to meet this challenge the government and the people in Kenya must pull together. We know only that out of our efforts and toil can we build a new and better Kenya. This then is our resolution.

For Harambee to succeed there was a need for a common language that would serve as an integrating force and a means of facilitating participation in national matters. Since leaders viewed nationhood as involving the cooperation amongst language groups using a single homogenous language, Kiswahili (Republic of Kenya, 1964, 1968).was endorsed as a unifying tool for the different ethnic groups.

2.4 KISWAHILI AS A UNIFYING LANGUAGE

Socio-linguistically, Kishe (2003) argues that Kiswahili is not associated with any dominant or powerful group of native speakers; hence, the decision to adopt it as an official language on independence in Kenya. Having developed as a trade language in the eighteenth century, its resemblance to other Bantu languages in structure and vocabulary attracted loyalty from other Bantu language-speaking groups. Additionally, its flexible structure not only provided room for it to adapt to social changes, thereby expanding further, but also gave it the ability to assimilate and incorporate into its structure linguistic forms from other languages. The widespread use of Kiswahili and the role it played in enhancing social interaction, economic interaction and integration thus made it a resource for the advancement of development and political unity (Mazrui, 1992; Mazrui & Mazrui, 1993).

In 1969, the then President of Kenya the late Jomo Kenyatta proposed that Kiswahili should be used as the language of parliament, and in July 1974 it was made the national language of Kenya. Kiswahili was also adopted as a national language in Tanzania. The bold cultural choice made by

Nyerere was meant to promote social integration and unity of the people of Tanzania. His view was that the East African region had:

… politically inherited boundaries which are either unclear or such ethnologically and geographical nonsense that they are a fruitful source of disagreements… the present boundaries must lose their significance and become merely a demarcation of administrative areas within a large unit (Nyerere, 1966, p.212).

However, perhaps the solution was not so simple. As put by Indakwa (1978, p.58):

Modern African nationalism is now conceived as the necessary framework for the propelling force behind catapulting Africa into a complex industrial world. Africa needs to build their national states into stronger entities but this work can hardly be achieved when common languages of communication are alien languages rarely spoken and understood by the majority of the people in every African country.

2.5 COMPLEXITIES OF LANGUAGE AND CULTURE

To accomplish the pan-African goals and objectives, and to realize a renewal and reawakening for the African people, Africa had to embrace a language that would facilitate social integration and spur technological and economic prosperity. Mazrui and Tidy (1984, p.300) have also articulately argued that:

English and French are invaluable in various ways for modern African development; they help integrate Africa in world culture, and they are politically neutral in the context of Africans multi-ethnic societies. But they do not necessarily help to overcome the crisis of national integration which is one of the most fundamental political problems facing African countries.

According to Wardhaugh (1986), there are various claims on how language and culture are said to be related. Drawing from Goodenough (1957) he defines culture as “whatever it is one has to know or believe in order to operate in a manner acceptable to its members, and to do so in any role that they accept for any one of themselves” (p.167). Culture is the “know how” that a person must possess to get through the task of daily living. As Wardhaugh points out, the structure of a language determines the way in which its speakers view the world. Even though the structure may not determine the world view, it is still extremely influential in predisposing speakers of a language toward adopting a particular worldview. The culture of a people finds reflection in the language they employ, because they value certain things and do them in a certain way; they come to use their language in ways that reflect what they value and what they do. In this view, cultural

33 requirements do not determine the structure of language but they do influence how a language is used and perhaps determine why specific things are the way they are. He writes:

Human beings do not live in the objective world alone, nor alone in the world of social activity as ordinarily understood, but are very much at the mercy of the particular language which has become the medium of expression for the society. It is quite an illusion to imagine that one adjusts to reality essentially without the use of language and that language is merely an incidental means of solving specific problems of communication or reflection. The fact of the matter is that the “real world” is to a large extent unconsciously built up on the language habits of the group… We see and hear and otherwise experience very largely as we do because the language habits of our community predispose certain choices of interpretation (cited in Wardhaugh, 1986, p.212).

His student, Whorf, who views the relationship between language and culture to be deterministic, further extended these ideas and argued that:

We dissect nature along lines laid down by our native languages… We cut nature up, organize it into concepts, and ascribe significances as we do, largely because we are parties to an agreement to organize it in this way - an agreement that holds throughout our speech community and is codified in the patterns of our language. The agreement is, of course, an implicit and unstated one, but its terms are absolutely obligatory; we cannot talk at all except by subscribing to the organization and classification of data, which the agreement decrees (Cited in Wardhaugh, 1986, p.213).

As highlighted above, different speakers will therefore view the world differently in so far as the languages they speak differ structurally. Grammatical categories available in a particular language not only help the users of that language to perceive the world in a certain way but also at the same time limit such perceptions. As Wardhaugh argues, they act as blinkers; an individual perceives only what his/her language allows or predisposes him/her to perceive. In this manner, language is seen to be controlling people’s worldviews; hence speakers of different languages will therefore have different ones. From this perspective language provides a screen or filter to reality, determining how speakers perceive and organize both the natural and social world around them. Consequently, the language one speaks helps to form one’s worldview, which means that language is not used simply to report one’s experience but it is what defines it. This concept was echoed by both Kenyatta and Nyerere when they promoted the use of Kiswahili in Kenya and Tanzania respectively.

On the other hand, Appiah’s (1992) view is that there is a need to think about Africa’s contemporary cultures in the light of the external determinants of her history, that is, European and Afro-New World conceptions of Africa and her own endogenous cultural traditions. Ideological

34 decolonization can only be made possible by finding a negotiable middle way between the endogenous tradition and Western ideas. Speaking specifically of the idea of the decolonization of African language, Appiah insists that in much of the talk about decolonization we find a “reverse discourse”:

The pose of repudiation actually presupposes the cultural institutions of the West and the ideological matrix in which they, in turn, are imbricated. Railing against the cultural hegemony of the West, the nativists are of its party without knowing it… (D)efiance is determined less by ‘indigenous’ notions of resistance than by the dictates of the West’s own Herderian legacy – its highly elaborated ideologies of national autonomy, of language and literature as their cultural substrate. Native nostalgia, in short is largely fuelled by that western sentimentalism so familiar after Rousseau; few things, then are less native that nativism in its current form (Appiah, 1992, p.60).

According to Appiah, much of the conception of contemporary locality and indigenousness is itself historically contingent upon encounters between one civilization region and another. Within such interactions, many of them historically imperialistic (in this case the use of Kiswahili Language in Kenya), there has developed a sense of particularistic locality, albeit the latter is, in large part, a consequence of the expanding institutionalization of the expectation and construction of local particularism.

Central to the above assertion, therefore, is an urgent need for an ethical universal that transcends social fragmentation and bridges differences. Its foundation should be located in reasonableness that accommodates competing beliefs and behaviours without polarizing the differences among them. It is this disposition that will enable an inclusive humanism. It is a disposition that requires a form of understanding or conceptualization that accepts that boundless nature of the context in which cultural symbols manifest themselves and thus making the world a great society characterized by both homogenization and hybridty. The point is discussed in greater detail in the next section.

2.6 HOMOGENIZATION OR HYBRIDTY

The points referred to above have also been emphasized by Stuart Hall (1992, 1994), who argues that even though there is an erosion of national identities caused by the cultural homogenization, it is also possible to see a form of resistance and reinforcement of local identities. Underlining the concept of hybridization understood as the development of new identities and new ethnicities, this possibility, he argues, concerns the affirmation of translated identities:

… that cut and intersect natural borders, constituted by those who are dispersed forever by their own homeland. These subjects continue to keep in touch with their original world traditions but they have no more the illusion to come back to the previous condition and to their countries. They are forced to compare themselves with new cultures where they live without becoming similar to them and loosing forever their identities… The difference is that they will never be unified as in the past, because they are the product of multiple experiences and different cultures; they belong to one motherland but at the same time to many motherlands (Hall, 1992, p.310).

In this manner he considers hybridity to be the constant process of differentiation and exchange between centre and periphery and between different peripheries, but it is also a metaphor for the formation of identity as a product of these particular connections.

In an effort to deal with these “in-between” categories of competing cultural differences, Homi Bhabha (1994) has also attempted to shed light upon the liminal negotiation of cultural identity across differences of race, class, gender, and cultural traditions:

It is in the emergence of the interstices - the overlap and displacement of domains of difference - that the intersubjective and collective experiences of nationness, community interest, or cultural value are negotiated. How are subjects formed ‘in-between’, or in excess of, the sum of the ‘parts’ of difference (usually intoned as race/class/gender, etc.)? How do strategies of representation or empowerment come to be formulated in the competing claims of communities where, despite shared histories of deprivation and discrimination, the exchange of values, meanings and priorities may not always be collaborative and dialogical, but may be profoundly antagonistic, conflictual and even incommensurable? (1994, p.2).

In other words, he argues that cultural identities cannot be ascribed to pre-given, irreducible, scripted, ahistorical cultural traits that define the conventions of ethnicity. Nor can colonizer and colonized be viewed as separate entities that define themselves independently. Instead, Bhabha suggests that the negotiation of cultural identity involves the continual interface and exchange of cultural performances that in turn produce a mutual and mutable recognition (or representation) of cultural difference. As he argues, this liminal space is a hybrid site that witnesses the production rather than just the reflection of cultural meaning:

Terms of cultural engagement, whether antagonistic or affiliative, are produced performatively. The representation of difference must not be hastily read as the reflection of pre-given ethnic or cultural traits set in the fixed tablet of tradition. The social articulation of difference, from the minority perspective, is a complex, on-going negotiation that seeks to authorize cultural hybridities that emerge in moments of historical transformation (1994, p.2).

It is in this sense, to use his own words,

that the boundary becomes the place from which something begins its prescencing in a movement not dissimilar to the ambulant, ambivalent articulation of the beyond, always and ever differently the bridge escorts the lingering and hastening ways of men to and fro, so that they may get to other banks… The bridge gathers as a passage that crosses (ibid., p.5).

Bahbha’s liminality model engages culture productively in that it enables a way of rethinking the realm of beyond that has been understood only in terms of the ambiguous prefix ‘post’, as in postmodernism, post-colonialism, post feminism. Liminality not only pertains to the space between cultural collectives but between historical periods, between politics and aesthetics, between theory and application. Hybridity as argued here is the process by which the colonial governing authority undertakes to translate the identity of the colonized (the other) within a singular universal framework, but then fails, producing something familiar but new. He contends that a new hybrid identity or subject-position emerges from the interweaving of elements of the colonizer and colonized that challenges the authenticity and validity of any essentialist cultural identity.

This new mutation replaces the established pattern with a mutual and mutable representation of cultural difference that is positioned in between the colonizer and colonized. For him it is the indeterminate spaces in-between subject-positions that are lauded as the locale of the disruption and displacement of hegemonic colonial narratives of cultural structures and practices. He posits hybridity as such a form of liminal or in-between space, where the cutting edge of translation and negotiation occurs and which he terms ‘the third space’. This is a space intrinsically critical of essentialist positions of identity and a conceptualization of original or originary culture:

The importance of hybridity is not to be able to trace two original moments from which the third emerges, rather hybridity to me is the third space which enables other positions to emerge (Bhabha, in Rutherford, 1990, p.211).

2.7 THE TRANSCULTURAL OTHER

As asserted above it is in order to argue that the third space is a mode of articulation, a way of describing a productive, and not merely reflective, space that engenders new possibility. It is an interruptive, interrogative, and enunciative space of new forms of cultural meaning and production that blurs the limitations of existing boundaries and calls into question established categorizations of culture and identity. According to Bhabha, this hybrid third space is an ambivalent site where cultural meaning and representation have no primordial unity or fixity. The hybrid identity is positioned within the third space, as lubricant in the conjunction of cultures. The hybrid’s potential lies in its innate knowledge of tansculturalization, the ability to transverse both cultures and to

37 translate, negotiate and mediate affinity and difference within a dynamic of exchange and inclusion. It has encoded within itself a counter-hegemonic agency. At the point at which the colonizer presents a normalizing, hegemonic practice, the hybrid strategy opens up a third space of or for re-articulation of negotiation and meaning (ibid., 1994, pp.36-37; Gilroy, 1993, 2000, 2002).

Drawing on Wang and Yeh (2005), hybridity, in this sense, involves the generation of new ways in which to understand and to generate possible new cultures. The birth of a ‘third space’ therefore requires a process of dialectic discourse and reflective interaction through which ideas, values, and meaning clash and are negotiated and regenerated. Without this element is not much more than a simple mixing and hybridizing to include forms that blend different elements. In practice, however, hybridity in cultural production is not always achieved through dialectic discourse among cultures, whether in an effort to globalize or to localize. For example, under the capitalist maxim of minimizing cost and maximizing profit, hybridization is reduced to hasty, cosmetic and even casual incorporations of different nominal elements. The localization of transnational text, for example, often involves no more than using local actors and actresses in transnational advertisements, local hosts and players in licensed televised game shows or, as is seen in some soap operas, local names for cities and characters. They caution that hybridity in these products, whether initiated by transnationals or local producers, may be common yet has remained at the superficial level where the ‘mainstream’, as defined by market size, permeates and prevails. As some have warned, localized products are not local products; they are essentially global. To go beyond this superficial level of hybridization, they assert that transculturalism become necessary. Even though from this perspective hybridization and globalization may lead to the loss of cultural distinctiveness, they argue that

by losing what was there, we are presented with something new, something unique, and something that represents yet another culture. It is only when we lose sight of the dynamic nature of culture and lock ourselves into a quest for cultural essentialism that the hybridization of cultural products will necessarily lead to stale homogeneity (ibid., pp.187- 188).

Thus, what needs to be preserved, in Mamardashvili's (1992) view:

…is the right to live beyond one's culture, on the borders of cultures, to take a step transcending one's own surrounding, native culture and milieu not for the sake of anything else. Not for the sake of any other culture, but for the sake of nothing. Transcendence into nothing. Generally speaking, such an act is truly the living, pulsating center of the entire

human universe. This is a primordial metaphysical act (1992, p.335).

Mamardashvili’s understanding of metaphysics is as the movement of liberation from any social or cultural identity. From this standpoint, transculture does not mean adding yet another culture to the

38 existing array but rather it is a special mode of existence spanning cultural boundaries, a transcendence into "no culture," which indicates how, ultimately, the human being exceeds all "genetic" identities and definitions. He views culture as capable of transcending itself, that is exceeding its own boundaries and therefore containing possibilities for transculture, which he defines as an open system of all symbolic alternatives to existing cultures and their established sign systems. However, he argues that:

This does not mean that all our past and present cultural identities are to be forsaken for the sake of transcultural liberation. The transition of humans from a natural to a cultural condition did not deprive them of their physical bodies; on the contrary, their bodies acquired new expressiveness and vigor through the exercise of symbolic activities, such as speaking, dancing, drawing, training in various arts and sports. In the same way, transcultural activity does not deprive us of our symbolic bodies, our constitutive identities as Russians or Americans, males or females. On the contrary, by transcending our identities we for the first time come to realize and appreciate fully who we are (1999, p.5).

In relation to this, Epstein (1999) also argues that in a world that has been radically and irrevocably changed by the internet and by globalization, exceedingly problematic enterprise spawned by Western capitalist imperialism, as well as intercultural contact and exchanges are bound to occur. It is critically important that we become aware of the different levels on which such contact and exchange can take place. While superficial exchange certainly entails acquiring new information it cannot result in the experience of a change of being. In contrast, he believes that deep, genuine contact with ‘Otherness’ entails letting oneself actually be touched (i.e., changed) by the encounter. It is within that space that one can experience the ‘Other’ as actually a hitherto unsuspected facet of oneself. The idea that each human being is somehow the repository of all human culture, that each and every ‘Other,’ whether foreign or not, is only another aspect, another facet of him or herself, is breathtakingly radical and leads us into the metaphysical heart of the transcultural experience.

Gilroy (1993) and Voss (2003) go further, arguing that such lived experience of the transcultural also entails an experience of that ‘beyondness,’ in this case designating the opening of all cultures to that which crosses them and transcends them. If one experiences the transcultural one is no longer bound by a single, relatively closed culture, but on the contrary one can participate fully in one’s own native culture as well as the other cultures one encounters. However, at the same time one is able to go beyond the bounds of any particular culture, into the space of simply being human, which constitutes what can be understood as an emergent property of the sum total of one’s original native culture and subsequent encounters with other cultures. In the transcultural space, Voss believes we are filled with a sense of wonder because it is then that we begin to see what being human really means, and when we recognize ourselves in the “mirror of the Other” we have gone beyond the normal dichotomy of Subject and Object, the dichotomy which generally operates

39 when two individuals are together. It is then that we recognize the Self in the Other, because we realize that the Other is a Self too (Voss, 2003).

Castells (1997) also sees globalization as an age of nationalistic resurgence, expressed both in the challenge to established nation-states, and in the widespread reconstruction of identity on the basis of factors transcending nationality. Attitudes towards it may depend on the historical contexts, the materials available to collective memory and on the interaction between conflicting power strategies. Therefore, what really matters both theoretically and practically are the reasons why, how, by whom, and for what nationality is constructed. His view is that, historically and analytically, nations are entities independent from the state, and like nation-states are not historically limited to the modern identity as constituted in Europe in the two hundred years following the French Revolution. Current political experience seems to reject the idea that nationalism is exclusively linked to the period of formation of the modern nation-state, with its climax in the nineteenth century, replicated in the decolonization process of the mid-twentieth century by the import of the Western nation-state into the ‘Third world.’ To assert so, he says, is simply Euro-centrism. He views contemporary nationalism as more reactive than proactive; it tends to be more cultural than political and thus more oriented more toward the defence of an already institutionalized culture than toward the construction or defence of a state. When new political institutions are created, or recreated, they are defensive trenches of identity rather than launching platforms of political sovereignty.

Stremlau (1998) argues that in the case of Africa, nations have to be continuously questioned and revitalized by what they do in their everyday life. They are endangered by the challenges of globalization that lock people into themselves, but are also opened to others through a respectful dialogue of cultures based on genuine reciprocity and mutual acceptance. Thus, Africans will develop an identity, which has learnt, as Senghor would say, to “assimilate without being assimilated”. From these points of view, nationhood is to be understood not as an identity modelled on a subjectivity asserting itself through introspection and negation of the reality and truth of the world of “things” and “others” but through the phenomenological concept of a subjectivity which asserts its “presence” in the world of life by moving towards other subjectivities from “I” to “we”, in a mutually enriching inter-relation and interaction with them. Implied in this conception of nationhood is a factor of continuous enrichment that offers scope for internal diversity and a dynamic identity that considers otherness neither as alteration nor as alienation or a threat.

Globalization should thus not be viewed as a single all-conquering and homogenizing force driven by the systemic logic of capitalism or Western cultural imperialism. It does not overwhelm nation- states and destroy cultural differences based on ethnicity or some kind of local cultural affiliation, but rather it emphasizes co-existence interpretation, that is the greatest challenge is to make sense of the way in which political and cultural boundaries are permeated and re-established, transcended

40 and reinvented by complex processes of social change. Contemporary social life is seen less in terms of a straightforward conflict between globalizing and localizing trends and more as a complex interrelationship of both global and local aspects. If this is the case then what alternative forms of analysis and explanation are available to understand the efforts made by Kenya to use Kiswahili, first as a unifying force nationally, and second and more ambitiously in support of Nyerere’s regional integration?

Welsch (1999) summarizes transculturality as a consequence of the inner differentiation and complexity of modern cultures, which encompass a number of ways of life that interpenetrate or emerge from one another. He argues that the old homogenizing and separatist idea of cultures has been surpassed through cultures externally networking, today in an extremely interconnected and entangled way. Lifestyles no longer end at the borders of national cultures but go beyond. For example, the way of life of an economist, an academic or a journalist is no longer German or French, but rather European or global in tone. The new forms of entanglement are a consequence of migratory processes, as well as of worldwide material and immaterial communications systems and economic interdependencies and dependencies. As he argues, cultures today are in general characterized by hybridization. For every culture, all other cultures have the tendency to be inner- content or satellites, and there is no longer anything absolutely foreign because everything is within reach. Even though there is still a regional-culture rhetoric, it is largely simulatory and aesthetic. In substance everything is transculturally determined. Today in a culture's internal relations, among its different ways of life, there exists as much foreignness as in its external relations with other cultures.

The concept of transculturality therefore aims at a multi-meshed and inclusive, but not separatist or exclusive understanding of culture. It embraces a culture and society whose pragmatic feats exist not in delimitation but in the ability to link and undergo transition. In meeting with other life forms there are not only divergences but also opportunities to link up, and these can be developed and extended so that a common life form is fashioned that includes even reserves which had not earlier seemed capable of linkage. Extensions of this type represent a pressing task today. It is a matter of readjusting our inner compass away from the concentration on the polarity of the own and the foreign to attentiveness for what might be common and connective wherever we encounter things unfamiliar. Hence, as transculturality pushes forward, the mode of diversity is altered, from being traditionally provided in the form of single cultures, which are increasingly disappearing, to a diversity of different cultures and life forms, each arising from transcultural permeations (ibid., p.200). As Welsch writes:

Different groups or individuals, which give shape to new transcultural patterns, draw upon different sources for this purpose. Hence the transcultural networks vary already in their inventory, and even more so in their structure. The transcultural webs are, in short, woven

with different threads, and in different manner. Therefore, on the level of transculturality, a high degree of cultural manifoldness results but it is certainly no smaller than that which was found between traditional single cultures. It's just that now the differences no longer come about through a juxtaposition of clearly delineated cultures (like in a mosaic), but result between transcultural networks, which have some things in common while differing in others, showing overlaps and distinctions at the same time (1999, pp.212-213).

The main point that is central to the above assertion is that it is difficult to draw boundaries that separate human ensembles confronted with each other, or to be able to create the kind of nationhood that Kenya seeks. In this regard, the concept of nationhood must be free from geopolitical concepts organized around the idea of borders. Instead it has to be seen as having no location, and as being shaped by aspects that demonstrate a creativity and ability to influence and generate responses from others placed differently. It is related closely to historical developments that cannot be understood without considering changes that have occurred in time and space (cf. Bayart, 2005). However, the concept of nationhood that is predominant in Kenya, is still bound to both ethnic and linguistic heritage and promotes a sense of difference determined on the basis of these factors. This is a matter of concern, especially in a globalized society where culture and identity can no longer be narrowly understood in terms of one’s ethnicity or language an d, have been changing over time and space. To further clarify this concern, specifically as it relates to Kenya, the next chapter looks at the policy that views History as a school subject that has to nurture nationhood in order to highlight its implications for teaching practices adopted for lessons dealing with this subject. By drawing on conceptions of history as an academic discipline, the knowledge and skills emphasized by each are looked at critically to highlight their implications for what schools need to focus on when teaching history to promote national identity and, specifically, Kenya’s wish to use historical knowledge to promote nation-building.

CHAPTER 3

HISTORY AS A SCHOOL SUBJECT

3.1 INTRODUCTION

There has been controversy about history as a school subject and sharp debates surrounding its content (Goodson, 1998; Pankhania, 1994). The controversy has focussed on how to balance content and skills in the classroom (Aldrich, 1997; Crick, 1998), the appropriate balance in classrooms between the pupils’ investigation of historical problems and teacher exposition about the past (Husbands, 1996; Jenkins, 1991), and what sort of historical understanding to promote and how it should be assessed (Lee, 1992; Medley & White, 1991). The debates, meanwhile, arise from fundamental disagreements about the nature and place of history in the school curriculum and society. Lee sees all of them as important, but argues that they have tended to isolate history in schools from developments elsewhere in the discipline. In his words:

The reason for teaching history is not that it changes society, but that it changes pupils; it changes what they see in the world, and how they see it… To say someone has learnt history is to say something very wide ranging about the way in which he or she is likely to make sense of the world. History offers a way of seeing almost any substantive issue in human affairs, subject to certain procedures and standards, whatever feelings one may have (Lee, 1992, pp.23-24).

Whilst, on the one hand, there are fundamental differences between the ways historians work and the ways pupils and teachers work, Husbands (1996) points out that where historians are engaged in an interpretive activity relating the current state of the discipline to new research findings, history teachers are largely concerned with their pupils’ intellectual and personal development. Where the historians are concerned with the archive, the teachers are concerned with the classroom. He argues that there is an academic discipline called “history”, a school subject called “history”, and a widespread popular interest in “history”, and sees no reason all these pursuits should have the same label, nor why the label should have the same meaning in different contexts. As he puts it:

Even though it is naive to assume for example that a 16 year old pupil in the classroom is engaged in a task which is comparable to the academic in the archive, it is nonetheless true that they are both engaged in constructing an interpretation of the past. The one may not “model” the procedures of the other, but their different “histories” have a common concern. Just as academic historians are concerned to develop understandings of the past whilst being aware of the limitations of historical method, so history teachers try to develop pupils’

understanding of the past and of the limitations of historical understanding (Husbands, 1996, p.5).

On the other hand, Carr (1990) sees History as consisting of a corpus of ascertained facts, which are “available to the historian in documents and inscriptions. The historian collects them, takes them home, and cooks and serves them in whatever style appeals to him” (p.9). History is concerned neither with the past by itself nor with the historian’s thought about itself, but with the two things in their mutual relations. The past which a historian studies is not a dead past but one which in some sense is still living in the present, however a past act is dead, that is, meaningless to the historian unless s/he can understand the thought that lay behind it. Hence, all history is the history of thought and history is the re-enactment in the historian’s mind of the thought whose history s/he is studying. The reconstitution of the past in the historian’s mind is dependent on empirical evidence, but it is not itself an empirical process, and cannot consist of a mere recital of facts. On the contrary, the process of reconstitution governs the selection and interpretation of the facts, which is what makes them historical facts (ibid., p.21). As Carr puts it:

The facts are really not at all like fish on the fish monger’s slab. They are like fish swimming about in a vast and sometimes inaccessible ocean and what the historian catches will depend partly on chance, but mainly on what part of the ocean he chooses to fish in and what tackle he chooses to use – these two factors being of course determined by the kind of fish he wants to catch. By and large the historian will get the facts that he wants. History means interpretation (1990, p.23).

From the above quotation it can be argued the historian needs to start with a provisional selection of facts and a provisional interpretation in the light of which that selection has been made by others as well as by him or herself. This process of interpretation and selection undergoes subtle and perhaps partly unconscious changes through action which involves reciprocity between present and past. This makes history, in Carr’s view, a continuous process of interaction between the historian and his facts, an unending dialogue between the present and the past.

3.2 HISTORY AS DIALOGUE BETWEEN THE PRESENT AND PAST

The reciprocal process of interaction between the historian and the facts which constitutes the dialogue between the present and past is a dialogue not between the abstract and isolated individuals, but between the society of today and the society of yesterday. However, while no historians can claim as their own values an objectivity beyond history, ‘objective’ historians can be said to be ones with a capacity to rise above the limited vision of their own situation in society, in history, and with the capacity to project their vision into the future in such a way that it give them a more profound and more lasting insight into the past (ibid.).

While history affords us the opportunity to explore the actions of individuals and societies in the past, with the hope that we can make sense of the world we inhabit, the relationship between the past and present history remains broadly unexplained. It is for this reason that Boix-Mansilla (2000) fears that attempting to examine the present through the lens of history carries with it important risks:

Left to their “unschooled minds”, students (and teachers) will likely exhibit the “sins” of anachronism and decontextualization. They may fail to properly historicize such constructs as “prejudice” or “propaganda” and remain unable to capture the unique ways in which “prejudice” or “propaganda” have changed form and meaning over time and across societies. In addition linking past and present in history education may reinforce students’ intuitive inclinations to interpret the past through the lens of their everyday contemporary experience. Un- schooled in the discipline of history, students may believe that they can “know” the lives of people in the past in the same way they “know” their contemporaries. Conversely, they may come to believe that understanding the lives of individuals and societies in the past yields immediate understanding of people and societies in the present. Both stances are “illusions of understanding”; they may satisfy the standards of truth of the unschooled mind, but they fall short of disciplinary standards of historical understanding (2000, pp.390-391).

From this stance, it is in order to argue that simplistic links between the past and the present may lead both teachers and students into succumbing to the temptation to put history at the service of particular moral, social, or political values. This may lead to the simplification of historical accounts and reduce them to a collection of “facile myths” about one group or one person’s heritage, identity or culture. Thus conceived, Boix-Mansilla (2000) further argues that historical accounts may become unimpeachable dogmas and moral lessons to guide present actions. Within this moral framework, the disciplinary scepticisms that might lead one to legitimately question the validity of historical accounts is mistakenly perceived as an affront to the values that such an account is said to embody.

In relation to this, Tosh (1991) argues that since our sense of personal identity demands roots in the past, which are often sought in the first instance in geology and family history, we cannot understand a situation in life without some perception of where it fits into a continuing process or whether it has happened before. Our sense of what is practicable in the future is formed by an awareness of what has or has not happened in the past. He therefore views history as a collective memory, the storehouse of experience through which people develop a sense of their social identity and their future prospects. However, Peter Burke at a conference of socialist historians in 1979 warned that “One comes to believe one’s own propaganda, to overdramatize the past, and hence to forget the real complexity of the issues at any time. One comes to idealize one’s own side and to divide human beings into us and them.” (Quoted in Tosh, 1991, p.21).

Myth-making about the past is incompatible with learning from the past. Historians have to undermine myths, which simplify or distort popular interpretations of the past. In addition to correcting myths about our own society, they can make positive contributions by exploring the myths that shape the consciousness of societies. The responsibility of historians is to provide a historical perspective, which can inform debate, rather than to service any particular ideology. Responding to the call of relevance is not a matter of falsifying or distorting the past but rather of rescuing from oblivion significant aspects of that past which speak to people directly:

It is through history that we understand the mechanisms of change and continuity and the many ways in which problems are posed and resolved in society. We learn to recognize and weigh the different interests, beliefs, experiences and circumstances that guide human beings inside and outside their own societies, in the past and in the present. History enables us to understand how such interests, beliefs and experiences drive human beings to construct knowledge, and makes us aware of the value of knowledge and of its relative nature (Tosh, 2000, p.3).

The view was also expressed by Elton several decades previously:

Teachers of history must set their faces against the necessarily ignorant demands of society… for immediate applicability. They need to recall that the usefulness of historical studies lies hardly at all in the knowledge they purvey and in the understanding of specific present problems from their prehistory; it lies much more in the fact that they produce standards of judgment and powers of reasoning which they alone develop, which arise from their very essence and which are usually clear-headed, balanced and compassionate (Elton 1969, in Tosh, 2000, p.29).

Subordinating history to values education undermines deep historical understanding when it forces teachers and students alike to lose sight of the meticulous process by which understanding of the past is established and revised by historians, no matter how difficult and morally problematic the past may be (ibid., p.391).

To summarize, the essence of the above discussion is that history must be viewed as an interpretive discipline and not otherwise, especially if it is to be used to nurture a sense of the learners’ national identity that has to be understood not only for its own value but also in relation to identities claimed by other nations. The ability to step outside one’s own assumptions and into the shoes of other countries, which inherit different national traditions, is indispensable to the effective conduct of international relations. A British history teacher once wrote:

The study of history is often little more than an attempt to cram the pupil with an assortment of arbitrarily chosen facts and opinions which he is expected to memorize and reproduce. The result is that he acquires a mass of ill-digested information, soon forgotten, but ends his

school career with no insight into meaning of history, no real historical groundwork, and littler ability to study the subject effectively. I would suggest that the study of history in schools can be infinitely more productive of result if for the attempt to instil information is substituted some carefully thought out and graded training in historical method, if the emphasis is placed not so much on the acquisition of historical knowledge as of correct methods of work and of capacity for historical thinking (Happold, 1928).

History teachers have to do more than provide an academic narrative to the students, rather their teaching should explore important issues. It is for this reason that approaches to teaching history should have distinctive rationale, views of the field, promoting a specific organization of content, selection of teaching methods and conception of what it means to know history. This is crucial if learners are to be made to understand historical knowledge and methods.

3.3 APPROACHES TO TEACHING HISTORY

There are three broad approaches to history education, namely history as (i) a chronologically organized tool, (ii) an investigation of contemporary themes, and (iii) a form of intellectual inquiry and a way of thinking. Each has its own distinctive rationale, view of history, organization of content, selection of teaching methods and conception of what it means to know history, and is dealt with in turn below.

3.3.1 History as a chronologically organized tool

The approach defines history as a chronologically organized story, an authoritative description of what happened in the past, generally centred on the actions of the individuals. Its content consists of what its proponents see as the main episodes in the building of the nation and particularly the definition of its borders, the peopling of its land, its economic development, its relations with the neighbours, its defence against its enemies, and the nature of its government. Its pedagogy takes a variety of forms, from traditional ‘chalk and talk’ to field trips and drama, but its essence is the transmission of information from teacher and textbook to student. To know history means the acquisition of a working knowledge of the main events, dates, and facts of the past. It steers clear of questions of interpretation and the nature of historical evidence, judging them either to be too complex or too detrimental to its conception of history as authoritative narrative (Osborne, 2006).

This approach is supported by various authors who view chronology as an important aspect in history education, for example, Stow and Haydn (2004), who argue that the concept of chronology has a central place in the development of historical understanding and that historical evidence derives its meaning from the timeframe in which it is set. Also, according to Lomas (1993, p.20),

47 without a grasp of the concept of time there can be no real understanding of change, development, continuity, progression or regression. These views are justified by referring to what Bruner (1960), a few decades ago, suggested when he argued that a key task in the process of education is to learn structure, which in short is to learn how things are related. In terms of how children make sense of the past, their ability to sequence events and gauge their distance from the present is one of the prerequisites to developing a working structure or mental framework of the past and establishing at least one dimension of how events are interrelated. For example, in the UK there has been a public debate about the use of a national history curriculum for British schools to strengthen ‘Britishness’. Goodson (1994) argues that, due to globalization, the British have used the school curriculum as an arena for asserting control and re-establishing their national identity, with history chosen to revive and refocus national identity and ideology. There has been a focus on British history in the formative years of schooling as a way of inculcating a sense of nationhood in the learners.

The stance relates to White’s (1996) argument that part of a school’s role is to help pupils discover who they are, and if this is not done then the system risks leaving them unnecessarily confused by not equipping them to understand their nationality. For him, learners are only able to understand who they are if they are made to see how nationality has come into being. This can be done through various school activities and subjects. Relating to the British curriculum, he writes that:

History is a subject especially relevant to nationality… Pupils need to understand the importance of the Act of Union, something of the separate national and pre- national histories, which lay behind it, the original connotations of Britishness, and the historical roots of more acceptable versions of it, which may replace it (1996, p.337).

Howkins (1989) too asserts that in teaching national history the course should set up the nation as the object of study, problematize the very idea, and then examine aspects of that problem in more detail. In applying their historical knowledge, learners need to be engaged in the debate about their nationality and the future of their national community. However, for this to take place, Tamir (1993) insists that schooling should enhance understanding of other people within a local and wider context. In her view, the result will be reflectiveness and self-determination as well as a non- chauvinist welcoming of national attachments on the part of those outside one’s ethnicity.

It is from this kind of understanding that Enslin (1999) emphasizes that if learners are made to understand how national myths and histories have come about, and how they are affected by them, it will be possible to create a sense of choice and autonomy necessary for a positive identity. It is not that education should promote only knowledge and not belief, but that autonomy requires that beliefs rest on reasons or evidence for holding them to be true, and they should also be held provisionally, in case rational reflection on some new evidence or argument were to persuade them to reconsider:

It does imply that education should not encourage pupils to embrace false beliefs. Indeed, education and particularly education for a democratic way of life must include directing pupils’ attention to the exposing of false beliefs; especially the myths that political and commercial entrepreneurs would have them embrace. (Enslin, 1999, p.105)

Such fears have also been expressed by others, including Pankhania (1994), that if the teaching of history focuses on events and when they occurred, then learners will not be able to have a whole historical understanding and experience of historical issues, which may hinder, in this case, the development of an appropriate national identity. Writing in relation to the British curriculum she asserts that there is more to the teaching of history than time and events. If the aim of history is to help students make sense of the past in order to understand the present, and to respond to the future constructively, then the history they are taught should not be based primarily on the selected glories of the past, or making sense of the present from half-truths about the past. With a distorted understanding of the present it is not possible to participate fully in society:

… unless we understand and come to terms with the beauty and the warts of our collective history, we will not be able to make sense of the present and respond constructively to the future. The history of all people after all has oppressive as well as liberating elements. The beauty of Britain’s history is the struggle of its people and the people of its empire for justice; the warts of the British history are the dehumanizing forces with which Britain has ruled over its people and subjects (p.3).

Pankhania (1994) believes that teachers could offer their students a liberating history by identifying ways of teaching which not only focus on the greatness of Britain’s past but also examine how this development was achieved. Such teaching would aim to examine how groups of people lived in the past and related to each other, highlighting the perspective of the political economic base that existed between groups and thereby making sense of social and cultural lifestyles. This she argues is not the same as learning about isolated, unrelated incidents of the past because the approach requires a critical exploration of the continuous and ever-changing relationships between groups of people within the context of their political, economic, social and cultural lives. It is not made up of investigating discrete events of the past, but involves a rigorous examination of the dialectical nature of historical development and underdevelopment, of power and exploitation, of oppression and resistance, in order to make sense of the past and present experiences of groups of people (ibid., p.55).

In light of the above assertions, and in spite of Wallerstein’s claim (1991, p.78) that “Past-ness is a central element in the socialization of individuals, in the maintenance of group solidarity, in the establishment of or challenge to social legitimation”, it is reasonable to argue that it is the very nature of history that should remind us that it is a critical field of struggle in society. No particular

49 historical narrative of a nation at any one time is guaranteed in advance, but rather it is a product of contemporary political, economic, and social conditions. The discourse of history changes in numerous circumstances, and both monumental shifts and a continuous flow of small changes affect the present. These guarantee that history is always an open, fluid discourse, which represents at any given moment the relation between a present and its past (see also Dolby, 2000, p.176).

For some historians, such as Little (1990, pp.319-320), the twentieth century saw paradigm shifts in the understanding of physical reality, of humanity and of its relationship to that reality, and, most recently, the parameters of international relations. Only against the background of the past as revealed by history can these be thrown into relief and embedded in the consciousness of new generations. This view underscores that a national curriculum in history should make possible a perspective on the past which illuminates for the young their present, by promoting an understanding of the world through contributing to what Dunn (2000, p.122) calls a ‘bigger world history’. Drawing on Leften Stavrianos (1996), who contends that “we cannot truly understand western or non-western history unless we have a global overview that encompasses both”, Dunn argues that “it is on this basis that we can see how much interaction there is between all peoples in all times, and how important that interaction is in determining the course of human history” (op cit., pp.121-122).

This explains why national standards for world history written in the mid 1990s, a time of rapid global change, urged a curriculum in which the primary social context for all inquiry would be humanity, not just nations and regions:

These standards represent a forceful commitment to world-scale history… The aim is to encourage students to ask large and searching questions about the human past, to compare patterns of continuity and change in different parts of the world, and to examine the histories and achievements of particular peoples or civilizations with an eye to wider social, cultural, or economic contexts (Stavrianos, 1996, pp.45-46, quoted in Dunn, 2000, p.122).

It is in this sense that the second approach to teaching history defines ‘citizenship’ as active participation in political life, especially in the debates related to investigations of contemporary themes that are inescapable in any democracy and are a central element of its past, present and foreseeable future, rather than emphasising chronology as an important aspect of studying history. Even though the aspect is important, focussing mainly on events and when they occurred is likely to inhibit development of a comprehensive historical exposure, experience and conceptualization of contemporary issues.

3.3.2 History as an investigation of contemporary themes

With this approach, History is not seen as a chronological narrative starting at some point in the past and working its way forward, but as the investigation of contemporary themes such as federalism, regionalism or diversity, or of specific political issues. It organizes content, therefore, not as a story of nation-building but as the delineation of problems and themes in which students begin with the present and then move back in time. Its preferred pedagogy is not the transmission of information aimed at memorization of important facts, dates and events, but the investigation of problems. It talks about the skills (such as problem-solving, critical thinking, issues analysis, and decision-making) rather than knowledge; about ‘knowing how’ rather than ‘knowing that’. ‘Inquiry’ and ’discovery’ are the terms of choice. To know history means being able to apply historical knowledge to the analysis of contemporary issues and to deploy the appropriate skills of research, critical thinking, and communication.

This approach also presents a version of nation-building that focuses on the experience of the ordinary people who are seen as building the nation. It draws on social rather than political history and it is more reflexive. It speaks not of identity but identities, and sees identities not as plural but as fluid and always subject to debate and reformulation. Consequently, to learn history is not to be inducted into an already existing identity, but to learn to engage in a continuing and open-ended debate over its nature. In their view, the approach speaks more of historical thinking and rejects the traditional linkage of history teaching with citizenship, maintaining instead that history is a disciplined inquiry, a form of knowledge whose justification is intellectual not political (Cook, 2000; Seixas, 2000).

The approach recognizes that teaching history is not about giving knowledge but about enabling students to understand how to engage with knowledge that is to come into a state of knowing. From this, they acquire the ability to analyse, criticize, apply, change, and challenge. As Harrison and Knights (2003) argue, citizenship is concerned with developing the skills and understanding relating to decision-making, establishing and developing interpersonal relationships, exercising rights and responsibilities, participating in and contributing to the community. Schools are recognized here to be learning communities, and as such will need to support democratic forms of decision-making and establish systems that are participatory and collegiate. What is being advocated here is a departure from the more orthodox view of the school curriculum. This approach recognizes that developing the curriculum requires questioning and challenging, then in turn debating, making decisions and acting upon them. Developing the curriculum in this way entails processes, skills and attitudes which are at the heart of participative citizenship. It was in this sense that in the case of South Africa, Bam and Visser felt that through the teaching of history students could be prepared to be citizens in a democratic society, “We would argue strongly that for our new democracy to be effective, we need citizens with critical and reflective thinking

51 abilities. We believe that the history classroom is the ideal place to develop these skills” (pp.93- 94).

As Seixas (2000) observed, historians increasingly approach the nation-state as a social construct, seeing it not as the inevitable result of historic progress but as a political and social entity created and shaped by human endeavour. In the process they also trace its association with conceptions of race, gender, class and culture.

The important aspects in teaching history as outlined so far have to do with cultivating in students an interest in the past, without which nothing else is possible; instilling in them a sense of connectedness that situates the present in the context of both the past and future; showing them the range of behaviour of which human beings are capable; making them aware of alternatives to what otherwise they might take for granted, so that they acquire a sense of agency and choice; helping them understand the world in which they live, so that as citizens they can help to shape its future; and making them historically minded (ibid., pp.22-23).

Demystification, problematization, critical and detached inspection that challenges the depiction of events as little more than the outcome of historical contingency, that is of ideological myth-making and invention, is crucial. The creation of discourses aimed at the imposition of cultural hegemony has more indirectly served to erode the traditional linkage of history and nationalism that once characterized the teaching of history in schools. However, in giving up the traditional nation- building narrative, the schools have not sacrificed national history. Instead, the old nation-building approach sees national history as primarily that of the formation of the state, with a focus primarily on political rather than social history. The newer approach presents a version of nation-building that focuses on the experience of the people, who are seen as building the nation, and draws on social rather than political history. The approach is also less centralist, less focused on federal politics and the national economy, and more inclined to define nations in terms of their regions and cultures.

The comparison made here indicates that to teach for nationhood, national identity has not been seen as a stable coherent entity. While such teaching has been characterized by tensions and challenges, it has nonetheless been defined in terms of its shared values and experiences, which were (and could) be taught unproblematically to the young.

History in schools should not be approached as a process of assimilative socialization to an established tradition of citizenship, but rather a reflexive approach must be adopted. National identities must be viewed as fluid and always subject to debate and reformulation. In this view, to learn history is not to be inducted into an already existing identity, but to learn to engage in a continuing and open-ended debate over its nature. Thus, the newer approach speaks more of historical thinking (Seixas, 2000; Wineburg, 2001) and, in some formulations, rejects the

52 traditional linkage of history teaching with citizenship, maintaining instead that history is a disciplined inquiry, a ‘form of knowledge’ in Hirst’s (1974) sense, whose justification is intellectual not political (Lee, 1991; 1995).

National history, as Cook (2000) has observed, can too easily be transformed into something very different:

Although the nation - however defined - is a perfectly legitimate unit of historical analysis, ‘national’ history readily metamorphoses into ‘nationalist’ history, teleological history, history as a weapon… History, including ‘national’ history, is an intellectual discipline applied to understanding the past; nationalism is an interpretation of the past purporting to explain the present and designed to shape the future. The distinction is crucial (Cook, 2000, p.495).

This is far from the intellectual discipline applied to an understanding of the past, as explained below.

3.3.3 History as a form of intellectual inquiry and a way of thinking

Proponents of this approach believe that no study of history is complete, or even defensible, if it does not introduce students to the nature of history as a form of intellectual inquiry and a way of thinking. They have to learn not so much about the results of historian’s research as distilled into text books, but more about how those results were arrived at and how credible they are; how historians go about their work when they try to reconstruct the past; how evidence is tested and used to construct historical accounts and explanations; how objectivity and interpretation are related; and how historical narratives and interpretations can be evaluated and by what kinds of criteria. In short, they have to learn to do history by themselves, not merely what has been written by others, and to think historically.

In Canada, Osborne (2002) argues that the patriotism that history courses were intended to promote avoided the “we-are-the-greatest” note often heard in Europe and the USA. The goal was:

to secure through schools a patriotism in which national pride is fostered and national arrogance is discouraged, a patriotism which finds its meaning and its justification in the place which the nation can take along with all other nations in that common work to which people of all races and colours and language and lineage are called (2002, p.212).

This theoretical position emphasizes the third approach (Osborne 2006), in which history education is seen not so much as a preparation for citizenship but rather as a means of enhancing students’ intellectual development and extending their intellectual horizons. Even though the first and second approaches share this belief, this approach makes a distinctive claim that history is an

53 intellectual discipline in its own right, with its own methods of inquiry, tests of truths, and ways of thinking. It holds that history should be studied not because it somehow makes students better citizens but because to think historically is an important way of understanding the world. The approach sees history not so much as a body of knowledge that has to be learned, but more as a way of thinking about the past. It sees content not as a nation-building story but rather as the investigation of how historical narratives and accounts are constructed; of how historians do history; of what counts as historical evidence; of the relationship between fact and explanation; and of how historical accounts can be evaluated. The view has also been expressed in Husbands (1996) assertion that to build up understandings of the past in the classroom is to consider the raw materials that are available. These raw materials or relics are not in themselves history or the past but they do provide a basis for constructing history knowledge:

In one sense, the past is dead. Being past, the experiences of people in earlier times can only be recorded through analysis based on the relics they have left behind, through the physical, material and documentary remains available to us, even though such might be misleading or inaccurate. But in another sense, of course, the past is not dead at all: it exists through the ways in which we understand the past and in the personal, cultural and intellectual inheritance we each have. The past is constructed through our interpretations which in turn derive from the questions we think it important to ask about relics, we have, they are not in any useful sense evidence at all. The development of historical understanding is always the result of an active dialogue between ourselves, in the present, and the evidence in whatever form which the past has left behind (Husbands, 1996, p.13).

History should be viewed as an evidence-processing activity which plays an essential part in the preparation of learners for the demands of life outside and beyond school, where they will be confronted with a mass of information, much of it conflicting and advanced by advocates of particular political or commercial persuasions. The intellectual discipline of collecting, processing and rigorously analysing historical evidence is, then, one of the ways in which teachers prepare learners for analysing information with which they will be presented later. Asking and answering questions of historical evidence is a key element of history learning.

The starting point for most teachers, as Husbands pinpoints, is in thinking about the ways learners appear to understand that historical evidence has been informed, albeit unwittingly, by Blooms’ taxonomy of Educational Objectives. Bloom provided a model which allows teachers to develop learners’ thinking through a hierarchy of questions from simple to complex, from comprehension/extraction to evaluation, from comprehension to inference, from the focus on a single source to the synthesis of numerous sources, and from the particular to the general. Even though he believes that hierarchies like this have real value in helping to shape the way we think about learning, he warns that they may also create some difficulties for teachers. The overuse of

54 the taxonomy as a basis for questioning implies an assumption that pupil learning itself proceeds through a linear progression that is independent of the context. It assumes that learners can develop evidence skills which are independent of the evidence being studied, and again the significance of the context of evidence, of ways others have made sense of it, is underplayed (ibid., 17-18).

Even though hierarchies of questions have been deployed as a way of moving learners towards higher levels of historical understanding, it must be noted that higher levels are not in themselves developed through particular types of questions or cognitive demands. Rather, a learner’s understanding is developed via the type of thinking that questions are intended to support, and this places obvious obligations on the teacher in developing approaches to evidence which engage the learner’s attention, feelings and interests to generate understandings (ibid., p.25). However, there is always more to the evidence than questioning and interpretation can address. The past is not present within the evidence, giving it an identity; however, the evidence is the basis for something in ourselves rather than being something simply from the past; it does not have a clear identity. In this, the past itself is not what is generating the meaning but the meaning is generated through thought processes that enable meanings to be conferred on the past. The meanings of relics or the evidence are thus social and personal.

Unlike historians, school pupils will not claim to generate new public knowledge from the study of selected historical evidence, but they will generate new private understandings. Evidence has a place in historical work in the classroom not because it thereby makes classroom history authentic, nor because it models the activity of the historian, but because of the sorts of thinking it supports and the types of learning it makes possible. The key is the thinking which the evidence generates, and for teachers the task is about using evidence to develop types of thinking about the past. The evidence base of history provides teachers with a web of materials that make possible the construction of historical understandings. As Husbands writes:

Knowing about the past is never just about knowing when things happened. If learners cannot begin to explain why they happened, with what consequences and effects, if they cannot explain why some historical and events have a significance and resonance for them, if in short, they cannot develop an interpretive framework for their understandings of the past, then knowing about the past is reduced to a sort of quiz game. For this reason understanding the past is inseparably also about finding out what evidence exists, how it might be interpreted, what limitations it has, and about how historical events might be described by different commentators. In a complex changing society, it is naïve to expect that easy consensus will be achieved on the proper concerns of school (1996, p.133).

Hence the pupil, like the historian:

has to be able to enter into the mind and feeling of all the people involved in an event and appreciate their differing attitudes without necessary approving of their motives if he is to understand why they acted as they did… history demands an exercise of imagination or an ability to enter into the past sympathetically (ibid, p.54).

It is important for teachers to know that pupils do not come into school as “empty vessels”, but they bring into school and into the history classroom their own ideas about their world, their knowledge, understandings and, as important, their misunderstandings about the societies they are learning about, and a set of more general assumptions about the way people behave. The ideas that young people have about their world and the worlds of the past have a number of fairly obvious characteristics. For instance, their understandings are local, personalized and fragmentary. Their sense of time is restricted. They apply ideas about their own experience to the past intermittently, and they offer explanations of other places or periods in ways which sometimes relate to their own experience and sometimes not (ibid., pp.79-80).

Teachers scaffold pupils’ learning in history when they draw on their experience, education and training to support the ways in which they wish pupils to think about historical issues. Teachers by definition have a wider frame of historical reference than the pupils. They have read more widely and are able to make connections between historical issues more confidently and have a wider perspective on the nature and structure of historical change. This expertise in the nature of the discipline is what they have to contribute to pupils’ developing grasp of the subject. The way in which they talk, introduce historical issues and relate these to learners’ thinking characterizes their task as history teachers. The place of story is to support pupil thinking and not to replace it. The place of historical problem setting is to introduce possibilities and not to lose them. The place of teacher talk is to generate meaning and relevance, and to support the ways in which pupils construct interpretive understandings of the past. When teachers use language in this way they are not simply deploying effective learning techniques but are occupying one of the roles which oral historians have highlighted in their analysis of oral traditions as historical process (ibid., pp.90-91).

In this regard, Jan Vansina (1987) argues that the communication of messages from one generation to another is centrally concerned with the interpretation of expertise, which involves not only perception but also emotions essential to a notion of personality and identity. To realize the potential of any educative communication to develop interpretive understandings of the past, it should be sensitive to the ways students speak and use language in describing and framing activities. The classroom will be a place in which language is used to explore ideas and issues. The way teachers initiate communication is a powerful element in the way students construct their own images of the past. As Appleby et al. also assert:

Historical analysis teaches that members of the society raise structures that confine people’s actions and then build systems of thought that deny those structures. It also suggests that all bodies of knowledge acquire ideological overtones because their meaning is too potent to be ignored ... (1995, pp.308-309).

However, the efficacy of classroom questions has been seriously questioned by David Wood (1992), who argues that whereas teachers typically ask about two questions a minute, pupils rarely ask more than two questions an hour. Where in everyday life we ask questions to elicit information, teachers ask questions to which they already know the answers. Where in normal discourse we would give our interlocutor time to consider the answer to a question, to think through a response, teachers expect speedy responses in order to maintain pace and direction. Where questioning derives from a Socratic ideal in which the teacher asks questions to motivate, sustain enquiry and encourage reflection and analysis, most classroom questioning in history, at least, is concerned with relatively low level matters to do with checking that information has been encountered or work completed. In these situations, questioning appears to lose most of its force and fits uneasily aside the model of historical understanding outlined so far (ibid., pp.203-206).

In relation to Wood’s argument, if teachers are to realize the potential of classroom talk to develop interpretive understandings of the past, they need to shift the emphasis of classroom questioning to a concern with processes and ideas. Opportunities for students to develop ideas should be concerned with significant issues and the way they can be integrate those understandings into models and ideas about the past. These should be a matter of concern for history teachers. It is because outcomes in the form of pupil understanding matter that there is need for classroom questioning to be concerned with the way in which teachers provide opportunities for pupils to articulate their questions, their doubts and their concerns about the issues being discussed. For history teachers, this demands sensitivity to the ways their pupils speak and the way they use language themselves in describing and framing activities. It means using the classroom as a place in which language is used to explore ideas and issues rather than simply to describe the outcomes of reading and discussion. It means, in short, emphasizing in all they do the importance of having ideas and exploring those about the past. Words for both teachers and learners are the most potentially powerful tool in talking about history.

However, Appleby et al. (1995) observe that there is no arguable case for a single model of historical subjectivity or of historical truth. Moreover, history is not simply an enterprise in fiction because it involves procedures of dialogue with evidence, with their voices, however imperfectly mediated from the past. Teachers and learners have to establish a relationship with the past and with the way in which they both make a sense of the experiences of other people in different settings:

History fulfils a need by reconstituting memory… the renewable source of energy behind these historical inquiries comes from intense craving about what it is to be human (p.267).

Drawing on their view, there is a need to establish a more subtle, less absolutist understanding of the way in which knowledge is created. The knowledge of a nation and the world and language with which these are described is not simply in one’s own heads, nor is it a given feature of the nation in which one is living. It needs to be developed through the process of inquiry in classrooms, by teachers and learners in classrooms working to create meanings. Historical inquiry is not to be cut off from personal experience, rather it is fundamentally a way of relating the internal and the personal to the external, and the public:

History offers a variety of tools for effecting liberation from intrusive authority, outworn creeds and counsels of despair. Historical analysis teaches that members of the society raise structures that confine people’s actions and then build systems of thought that deny those structures. It also suggests that all bodies of knowledge acquire ideological overtones because their meaning is too potent to be ignored… It points to the power of a revitalized public when operating in a pluralistic democracy with protected dissent to mediate intelligently between society and the individual, knowledge and passion, clarity and obfuscation, hope and doubt. Telling the truth takes a collective effort (1995, pp.308-309).

From this perspective, the main difficulty is not just to find historical evidence but more to organize the available knowledge of the past so that new conceptions of today’s and tomorrow’s society can be able to grow out of it. History cannot be used to re-imagine or to re-build a national history without a clear understanding of the implications for classroom practice.

3.4 IMPLICATIONS FOR CLASSROOM PRACTICE

From the above assertions, major concerns would be with the way history teachers are able to create conditions for learners’ self- and social empowerment through what they teach, how they teach and the means whereby what is taught can be made worthwhile. This raises the issue of what history teachers can provide for students that will empower them not only to understand and engage the world around them but also to exercise the kind of courage needed to change the wider social reality when necessary. As discussed above, a new discourse for history education is needed, one that moves beyond the language on nation-building by addressing the connections between education and the changing role of the nation-state in a globalizing world. The important question is how History as a school subject can be used to enable learners to understand and appreciate the local and the global communities.

The next chapter addresses the issue by looking in detail at the implications for classroom practices of historical studies being used to promote nationhood. The role of history as a discipline that can be drawn upon to build and revitalize nationhood is examined by looking at historical knowledge as an aspect of a nationhood that can be used to foster unity in a globalized context. It also reflects on the nature and scope of this process by focussing on views that try to clarify how history has been viewed as a form of knowledge that could facilitate the nurturing of nationhood. The argument presented in this chapter is that when the concept of teaching history to develop nationalism became sociologically necessary in modern industrial societies, historical studies became useful for them and were viewed as indispensable for national coherence. National stability required homogeneity in consciousness and some form of cultural standardization that history had to provide. As educational knowledge, historical studies had to hold the political and national unit by imposing a shared culture on the whole population in a territory, particularly through the national education system. In this way all the members of the nation could have minimum flexibility in fulfilling the variety of roles they had to play, and nationalism became a political programme. Without this goal of creating a nation-state it was of little interest or consequence.

CHAPTER 4

HISTORICAL STUDIES AS CURRICULUM FOR NATIONHOOD

4.1 INTRODUCTION

According to Castells (1997), membership to a nation theoretically necessitates a reconstruction of a narrated group identity within an existing discourse and requires a re-definition aimed at the improvement of living with others. This involves revitalization of mental representations and positions constructed during colonialism as markers of a dialogue that promoted a form of reciprocity and mutual acceptance necessary for the development of the state and, subsequently, political self-determination. Practically, it provided cues to what should be considered when trying to understand strategies employed to engage with existing mental representations and positions as a way of revitalizing nationhood. Also, for Upton (1999), nationhood is abstract and built upon a foundation of fact. As an artefact that exists only in the mind, it has to be implanted and sustained by a deliberative and conscious process of acculturation. The target population must be persuaded that it has a unique identity, that is, a national character that distinguishes it from every other group (ibid., 153). Thus, a spectrum of cultural devices is employed to create the image.

This clarifies why Gellner (1983) and Hobsbawn (1992) argue that nationhood can only be successful if promoted within a modern nation-state. As a political principle it holds the political and national units are congruent. Gellner sees it as depending on political and intellectual elites that impose a shared culture on the entire population in a territory, particularly through the national education system. In this way all the members of the nation have minimum flexibility to fulfil a variety of roles. In his analysis of the transition from agrarian societies to modern industrial ones, he argues that it is only in the industrial stage that the state has become inescapable. Every society has or aspires to a state of its own, hence nationhood becomes such a universal aspiration in modern society. Nations, argues Gellner, are functional for industrial society, and indispensable in the modern world because industrial growth requires both widespread fluidity and patterned homogeneity, as well as individual mobility combined with cultural standardization. It was only with the onset of modernity that these conditions could be realized, explaining why the modern era is an age of nationalism.

Like Gellner, Hobsbawn (1990, 1992) also contends that nations are the product of nationalism, conceptually and historically, and sees them as constructed essentially by politicians and elites. To understand them, they must be analyzed from below in terms of hopes, fears, longings, and interests of ordinary people. Their main characteristics and goals are drives to build a nation-state.

Nationalism is a political programme and without the goal of creating a nation-state, nationhood is of little interest or consequences:

Nations only exist as functions of a particular kind of territorial state or the aspiration to establish one - broadly speaking, the citizen state of the French Revolution - but also in context of a particular stage of technological and economic development (1990, pp.9-10).

On the other hand, he argues that today nationhood has lost its state-making and economy-forming functions. In the nineteenth century it was plainly at the centre of historical development, carving out states and constituting territorially bounded national economies. However, globalization and the international division of labour have removed these functions, and the revolutions in mass communications and international migration have undermined the possibility of contemporary economic and social developments, with the basic political conflicts having little to do with nation- states. This leads to his conclusion that nationhood is a “substitute for lost dreams”, a reaction to the disappointment of larger hopes and aspirations. Despite its evident prominence today, it is

historically less important. It is no longer, as it were, a global political programme, as it may be said to have been in the nineteenth and earlier twentieth centuries. It is at most a complicating factor or a catalyst for other developments (ibid., p.181).

Nationhood is likely to be invoked in the foreseeable future to resist homogenization, overcome political crisis, divert attention from more crucial matters, oppose the increasing power of international and supranational organizations and give meaning to economic, political and social struggles.

At this time, when globalization is transforming the context in which, and the means through which, national identities are produced and reproduced, there is still a worldwide call for schools to use History as a subject to develop nationhood. Its importance has been heightened and the significance for history education has been strongly emphasized. For example, current discussions in Europe (Preuss et al., 2003), not only focus on the changing nature of the concept in a continent that has witnessed the fall of communism and faces increasing immigration and demographic changes, but also on expanding political and economic union, and the impact of global developments. There is general acknowledgement that the diversity inherent in a collection of countries that have their own languages, histories and political systems in relation to the EU, makes it:

... difficult to grasp the concepts of citizenship as they are used and understood in the member states of the community. The reason is that the concept of citizenship is not a purely legal one and that it is rooted in the political culture of the respective country (ibid., p.8).

National citizenship is seen as a challenge in an age of globalization, because it is generally viewed as promoting a reconstruction of identity on the basis of factors that transcend nationality. National citizenship cannot continue to be defined in terms of mental representations available to collective memory within historical contexts. In particular, globalisation poses a challenge to established notions of nation-states and nationhood, hence the above-mentioned importance in understanding why, how, by whom, and for what the notion needs to be constructed (Castells, 1997).

4.2 NATIONHOOD AS A CONCEPT

According to Anderson (1991), nations are imagined. The bonds of allegiance and belonging, which so many people feel obscure the institutional, political and territorial construction of nations, are the result of powerful and popular cultural resources and traditions that endow them with a sense of tangible reality. Therefore, as an “imagined political community – and imagined as both inherently limited and sovereign” (Anderson, 1991, p.6), the nation is imagined because its members will never know, meet or even hear most of their fellow members. Yet, in the minds of each the image of a communion lives as if it were reality. Anderson asserts further that communities larger than villages, with face-to-face contact, are imagined. What is important to the concept of a nation is the manner in which it is imagined as having boundaries that are elastic and therefore as one of a comity of nations. It is imagined as sovereign because in an age of enlightenment and revolutions nations wanted freedom. Because a nation is always conceived of as a deep horizontal comradeship

nation-ness, as well as nationalism are cultural artefacts of a particular kind. To understand them properly we need to consider carefully how they have come into historical being, in what ways their meanings have changed over time, and why, today, they command such profound emotional legitimacy (ibid., p.4).

This explains why Bayart (2005) has argued that the feeling of belonging to a national group is as atavistic as changes in time and space. For this reason, it is a subject that generates ambivalence. In one sense, nationhood or cultural identity has been a product of nationalist mobilisation that gave different people of the world the urge to build states and promote social and political integration, as was the case in the New World. For example, despite the United States being one of the most heterogeneous nations, with diversified historical experience and narratives amongst its people, their shared project made it possible to build a state – a federal republic - that was concerned with promoting what was seen to be a distinctiveness of community that could be used for building a nation (Anderson, 1983; Castells, 1997). In addition, it was a product of the reification of experiences from historical societies characterized by specific representations and positions, as happened when Europeans occupied countries south of the Sahara. The reification included

62 unifying aspects through which nations were to be built, namely occupation of a political territory, and common sets of memories, myths and symbols. As Stremlau (1998) argued, in the case of Africa, nationhood has to be continuously revitalized by what people do in their everyday life, and continuously questioned and endangered by all the challenges of globalization. It locks people into themselves, but also opens them to others through a dialogue of cultures based on some form of reciprocity and mutual acceptance. Thus, Africans will develop a sense of being which has learnt, as Senghor would say, to “assimilate without being assimilated”. From this point of view, Africanness is to be understood not as an identity modelled on a subjectivity asserting itself through introspection and negation of the reality and truth of the world of “things” and “others”, but through the phenomenological concept of a subjectivity which asserts its “presence” in the world of life by moving towards other subjectivities from “I” to “we”, in a mutually enriching inter-relation and interaction with them. This concept of nationhood emphasizes a continuous enrichment that offers scope for internal diversity and a dynamic identity that considers otherness as neither alteration nor alienation and threat. It therefore

cannot be conceptualized… in isolation of the dictates of the global economic system. In practice, this suggest that beyond the realm of theory, political rhetoric and discourse, the attainment of the vision will necessitate greater regional economic integration within Africa itself … and an effective integration of African continent into the international economic system (Stremlau, 1998, p.117).

For Miller (2000), national identities are characterized by three interconnected propositions, namely, personal identity, ethics and politics. Someone’s sense of being a member of a particular national grouping, seen as an ethical community and having a claim to political self-determination, is inter-connected in a manner that makes it difficult to feel the force of any of these aspects without acknowledging the others. He considers national communities as constituted by belief, and nationhood exists when its members believe that it does. Therefore, it is not a question of a group of people sharing some common attribute, such as race or language, but rather (quoting Ernest Renan) that a nation is a “daily plebiscite, its existence depends on a shared belief that its members belong together and a shared wish to continue their life in common”. It is a sense of being that embodies historical continuity. It is not only constituted by mutual belief, as Miller asserts, but is also extended in history, active in character, connected to a particular territory and thought to be marked off from other communities by its members’ distinct traits. This serves to distinguish it from other collective sources of personal identity. In Miller’s view, it answers one of the most pressing needs of the modern world, namely how to maintain solidarity among the populations of states that are large and anonymous, such that their citizens cannot possibly enjoy the kind of community that relies on kinship or face-to-face interaction. It enables people to feel a part of a larger community, giving them a sense of identity.

It is in this sense that Castells (1997) thinks of globalization as an age of nationalistic resurgence that promotes the widespread reconstruction of identity on the basis of factors that transcend a nationality dependent on historical contexts, materials available to collective memory and the interaction between conflicting power strategies. It poses a challenge to established notions of nation-states and nationhood. As expressed by Himmelfarb:

One does not have to subscribe to the doctrine of nationalism in its usual forms - national self-determination, or national assertiveness, or national aggrandizement - to accept the fact of the nation as a historical entity and the fact of nationality as a sense of identity or community among the people constituting a nation (1987, p.142).

Nationality as a principle of identity collects a diverse range of people and groups, traditions and ways of life into one. What the principles are and how they relate to each other vary from nation to nation. Every nation claims to stand in a specific and privileged relation to a homeland as the ground of its identity. As she puts it:

If the national homeland provides its members with a spatial location and identity, the nation’s history provided them with a location and an identity in time. Nationalism... is the story of the victories and triumphs, defeats and betrayals which have formed in nations. This narrative defines a nation... as an entity which endures through time and provides a link between those who live now and those who have lived in the past. ...it extends into the future... National identity is the recognition that members of the nation-past and future-have a common destiny (Himmelfarb, 1991, p.96).

Enslin (1993), however, defines a set of criteria on the basis of which a particular society would qualify as a nation; namely, common loyalty, occupation of a particular territory, political autonomy, living together, a common set of memories and myths, homogenous and common culture, sense of belonging together and political community, and argues that it is not realistic to ascribe a common identity to a society. She views such identity to be a sense of self that is informed by a person’s understanding of who s/he is in relation to others in a particular place and time. Using South Africa as example, she argues that within this country there are no shared distinctive characteristics because the society is culturally and linguistically heterogeneous. Members of this society have very different sets of memories and myths in which other members are often depicted as enemies rather than compatriots. Therefore, according to Enslin, accepting a certain national identity would persuade people to believe that they belong to the nation and that this membership imposes on them moral obligations to their fellow nationals.

As also indicated in the British Crick Report, citizenship education would, it was hoped, help to create a more politically engaged and civil nation. David Blunkett (1998) believed that education for citizenship was important to the survival of the an active democratic society in the new century

64 and could not be left to chance. For him it was crucial that young people be provided with opportunities in which they could be assisted to develop an understanding of what democracy and practices of government both local and national. By motivating them to participate in their communities they would learn how rights and responsibilities were linked and emphasize socially acceptable behaviour to others. This is what characterized active citizenship.

The Crick Report as viewed by many, however, adopts a traditional, top-down approach towards conceptions of politics and gives little acknowledgement of the essentially contested nature of citizenship. As Leighton (2004) observes, the Report designed citizenship education to encourage participation in the system and not to question or challenge it. This perspective he argues stems from the Report’s narrow definition of politics in statist terms. Citizenship is taken as uncontested, and given status rather than an aspiration towards which individuals continually struggle. This statist perspective also explains, to an extent, the Report’s relative neglect of structural disadvantages associated with class, race, disability and gender, and which account in part for the alienation of young people from mainstream politics. As a result, concentrating too much on moulding individual behaviour and neglecting the structural constraints on active citizenship teaches a one-dimensional version of citizenship that is at odds with the political realities (Hoffman, 2004).

According to Osborne (2002), this turning away from national history was hastened by developments in Canadian society. By the 1970s, the shortcomings of the conventional nation- building narrative were becoming too obvious to ignore in a country that was in fact and in policy increasingly multicultural, where hitherto ignored minorities were making their presence felt, where the rhetoric of human rights was increasingly heard, and where the old master-narratives were found wanting. Room had to be found in the national story for all the citizens. In addition, the turn to social history complicated the traditional narrative, not only by drawing attention to topics previously ignored, but also by calling into question taken-for-granted assumptions of significance and periodization. More fundamentally, the turn to social history removed the nation-state from the centre of the historical stage. The severing of nationalism and history, as Berger (1986) contended, was one of the most significant developments of the period. This was fundamental not simply because many historians no longer use the nation-state as either the subject or the context of their work, but rather they have increasingly made it and the discourse surrounding it an object of historical analysis (Osborne, 2000; Stanley, 2000).

Historians now increasingly approach the nation-state as a social construct, seeing it not as the inevitable result of historical progress but as a political and social entity created and shaped by human endeavour. In the process, they also trace its association with conceptions of race, gender, class, and culture. As O’Leary has observed:

Although modern nations claim to be bound together by essential unities and progressively unfolding histories—whether linked to civil or ethnic narratives—what appears as a national consensus is only accomplished through the articulation of basically unstable and often conflicting interests and their suturing into a sense of a unified national identity (1999, p.4).

If historical study as asserted above is viewed as a disciplined inquiry, then the question one needs to ask is whether national history is still relevant in a context of globalization. The next section addresses this.

4.3 NATIONAL HISTORY AND ITS RELATIONSHIP TO GLOBALIZATION

As a ‘momentum concept’, a nation’s history is of particular relevance in an increasingly interdependent world, where the security of human rights in one country is bound up with the plight of rights across the globe. According to Giroux (1999), within the last decade the concept of national identity has moved to the centre of debates around issues concerning community, culture, and difference. While arguments surrounding the struggle for national identity have surfaced with great forcefulness, the circumstances and contours of this struggle are rooted historically in a series of conditions that constitute the crisis of modernism. Central to this crisis are the emergence of new economic and technological forces on the world order, along with new social movements and forms of cultural criticisms that have unsettled some of modernism’s most cherished assumptions regarding national identity and culture. These assumptions include its emphasis on the mutually reinforcing categories of the unified and autonomous self and the construction of culture as synonymous with the most basic tenets of Western European civilization.

Giroux (1999) argues that modernism defined the relationship among national identity, culture, agency and community in ways that reinforced rather than challenged existing networks of hierarchy and exploitation. The modernist construction of the humanist subject often ignored how individuals were constructed within complex, multilayered, and contradictory social formations. At the same time the autonomous self became the most important unit of analysis in understanding human agency, freedom, and politics. Anchored in the notion of a static and unified identity, the conceptions of subjectivity and freedom were organized around a theory of the free and independent individual. Within this ideological matrix, the freedom and autonomy characteristic of the self-contained subject became the ideological referent for defining choice as the measure of freedom in the capitalist marketplace. In this version of modernism, the logic of the market narrowly defines parameters of freedom for both human agency and the larger sphere of democracy itself. Thus, missing from this discourse is the analysis of those social and political forces that constructed individual and collective identities across and within different economic, cultural, and social spheres. Lost here is any acknowledgement or account of the pluralization and

66 diversification of positions and identities available to people struggling over expanding claims to rights, redefining the terms of membership in the dominant society, and rewriting the rules of participation in the creation of multiple democratic public cultures and communities. Moreover, within this discourse the conception of agency as plural, subversive, and constitutive of social movements is rendered invisible. Instead of recognizing multiple, collective agents capable of both challenging existing configurations of power and offering new versions of the future, modernism constructed a politics of identity within narrow perimeters of an individualism that was fixed, unburdened by history, and free from the constraints of multiple forms of domination. Understood in these terms, modernism constructed a notion of identity through an ideology of individualism that erased the concept of the social problems. ,

Viewing citizenship education as a tool to promote nationalism has made advocates of the philosophy of multiculturalism such as Bhikhu Parekh (2000), to worry that:

Students taught to look at the world from the narrow perspectives of their own cultures are bound to reject all that cannot be accommodated within its categories. They are likely to judge other cultures and societies by the norms and standards of their own, and find them odd or even worthless. … Monocultural education also tends to breed arrogance, insensitivity and racism (Parekh, 2000, p.226).

For citizenship to retain its dynamism and emancipatory potential, it needs always to remain sensitive to changing definitions of the political. This is because the rights and responsibilities of citizenship expand or contract in part due to the changing definition of politics; new generations of citizens are likely to be inspired by different concerns and struggles from previous generations (Faulks, 2000).

Ahonen (2001) has argued that this sense of togetherness for which nations are striving, requires a Habermasian shared open space of interaction rather than common lessons. The effective functioning of this ‘open space’ depends in large part on citizens’ knowledge of history, so history teaching has to inform students of this element of their national reality, while also introducing them to those aspects of their past and present, the multiple perspectives they embody, and the debates to which they give rise and define the country in which they are growing up to become citizens. What is needed here is a combination of unity with diversity. Citizenship is in large part defined by engagement in an ongoing debate about the nature and future of nations, an engagement that to be fruitful and constructive must be historically informed, and to which the work of social historians makes an indispensable contribution.

4.4 CITIZENSHIP EDUCATION AS A TOOL FOR BUILDING NATIONHOOD

Amongst a number of linked themes and concepts identified by David Kerr (2003) as common to this notion of citizenship education were those of preservation, such as that of democratic society and its associated rights; the notion of participation in society; the preparation or capacity building of young people for active and informed participants; a focus on inclusion or integration into society; a concentration on a contemporary society, the encouragement of partnerships; and the promotion of an international perspective. The definition also highlights a number of key concepts that underpin citizenship education, including democracy, rights, responsibilities, tolerance, respect, equality, diversity and community. Citizenship education also involves the dimensions of knowledge and understanding, skills, attitudes and values. These dimensions are brought together through teaching and learning approaches, which have the primary goal of shaping and changing the attitudes and behaviour of young people through into their adult lives. The lifeblood of citizenship education is modern society and discussion of the topical and sensitive issues it throws up. Citizenship education enables consideration of these issues, often set within an appropriate historical framework, from a range of perspectives (Kerr, 2003, pp.7-8).

Much of what is described above reflects what McLaughlin (1992) calls a ‘maximal interpretation of citizenship’. This definition of citizenship education is broad and inclusive, encouraging investigation and interpretation, and it is as much about process as content. However, there can also be a form of citizenship education that leans towards a minimal interpretation of citizenship, often referred to as ‘civic education’. It promotes a form of citizenship that is narrow and exclusive, content-led and knowledge-based, allowing little opportunity for students to challenge or question. However, as Will Kymlicka warns:

Citizenship education is not simply a matter of knowledge of political institutions and constitutional institutions. It is also a matter of how we think about and behave towards others particularly those who differ from us in their race, religion, class and so on (1999, p.88).

Citizenship, like democracy, is part of an historical tradition that represents a terrain of struggle over the forms of knowledge, social practices and values that constitute the critical elements of that tradition. It is not a term that has any transcendent significance outside the lived experiences and social practices of individuals who make up diverse forms of public life. Therefore, as a socially constructed historical practice, it is important that it be problematized and reconstructed for each generation.

The suggestion in Giroux (1999) is that the notion of citizenship needs to be reclaimed by progressives and radicals as an important terrain of struggle. It should be seen as part of a wider effort to develop a philosophy that provides legitimacy for developing public spheres in which a

68 critical notion of citizenship can be given expression through a radical model of citizenship education. Citizenship in this case can then become a process of dialogue and commitment rooted in a fundamental belief in the possibility of public life and the development of forms of solidarity. This process will allow people to reflect and organize in order to criticize and constrain the power of the state and to overthrow relations that inhibit and prevent the realization of humanity.

To reclaim the notion of citizenship in the interest of an emancipatory public philosophy demands that the notion of citizenship be seen as an historical practice inextricably linked to relations of power and formations of meaning. In other words, if citizenship is to be dealt with in its broadest implications, it has to be analyzed as both an ideological process and a manifestation of specific power relations. As a manifestation of power relations, citizenship affirms and articulates between various public spheres and communities whose representations and differences come together around a democratic tradition that puts equality and the value of human life at the centre of its discourse and social practices. The concept of citizenship must also be understood partly in pedagogical terms, as a political process of moral regulation and cultural production, in which particular subjectivities are constructed around what it means to be a member of a nation-state. In more specific terms, the concept of citizenship must be investigated as the production and investment of ideological discourses expressed and experienced through different forms of mass culture, in particular sites such as schools to enabeg learners to be critical thinkers about social problems, identify injustices within society and transform existing political and economic inequalities.

Citizenship education in this view is most importantly, not merely about informing people or giving them the critical skills, but it should also be based on ethical considerations and social concerns. With this concept, education is moved to values that would be ethical in a democracy, and central to which is an intellectual disposition that has to prioritize questioning, defining, and shaping one’s relationship to the political sphere and the wider society. It would thus promote a politics of difference in which the demands, cultures, and social relations of diverse groups are recognized as part of the discourse of citizenship. Critical to the discourse would be a public philosophy that recognizes the boundaries between different groups, the self and others, and at the same time creates a politics of trust and solidarity that supports a common life based on democratic principles necessary for ideological and institutional preconditions for the recognition of both diversity and the public good. Hence, to teach for such citizenship or nationhood, history as a discipline should be able to promote a language that combines a strategy of criticism with one aimed at constructing social relations between an individual and the wider community that contribute to the realization of humanity.

The next chapter focuses specifically on the tensions that result when attempts are made to reconcile the individual and communal in a globalized context. The argument is that even though

69 much of the talk about globalization has tended to assume that it is a process which overrides the local, this assumption overlooks how what is called local is in a large degree constructed on a trans- or super-local basis. Much of what is identified as the local is in fact the local expressed in terms of generalized terms of locality. In other words, globalization in the broadest sense has involved, and increasingly involves, the creation and incorporation of locality. To clarify how this has happened the chapter first examines views that present globalization as a process of the imposition and domination of Western culture over the rest of the world. This kind of domination is perceived as bringing about an increased cultural homogenization of the world. Western cultural practices, institutions, goods and styles are being lifted from their territorial grounding and replicated across the world. This process is envisioned as leading to the elimination of cultural difference, and is seen to be promoting the production of a world of sameness. The question posed here is whether globalization is a Western project or not. In attempting to address this viewpoint, the discussion looks at globalization as a historical process, inscribed with contradictions that reshape modern societies and the world order and thus make the search for the identity of individuals more difficult. Secondly, and on the basis of the contradictions that are highlighted, an attempt is made to clarify the link, if any, between a global and a local reality. In the light of this discussion it becomes possible to clarify the stance taken in this study, that is, to view the local cultural heritage as distinct from the representation of a broader reality is to conceptually distort nationhood.

CHAPTER 5

GLOBALIZATION: CULTURAL HOMOGENIZATION AND HETEROGENIZATION

5.1 INTRODUCTION

Giddens (1990) and Tomlinson (1999) view globalization as the Westernization of the world, and therefore argue that it is not new but rather a continuation of modernity. However, for others like Robertson (1992), globalization involves the supplanting of modernity with a notion of globalism that implies an overall change in the basis of action and social organization for both individuals and groups. As a result, the debates about global homogenization or heterogenization highlight sources of the tensions that result when attempts are made to nurture nationhood in a context wherein local factors have to be reconciled with global ones. The next section looks at the differences between the positions to clarify the nature of these tensions and the level of Kenya’s preparation for particaption in globalization.

5.2 GLOBALIZATION: AN HISTORICAL PROCESS OF MODERNITY

Giddens (1990), in arguing that globalization is one of the consequences of modernity, associates modernity with a time period and initial geographical location, tending to organize and arrange social life across time and space, that is, to set up and order social institutions. Modernity refers to modes of social life or organization which emerged in Europe from about the 17th century onwards and which subsequently became more or less worldwide in their influence (ibid., p.1). In pre- modern societies space and place (locale) largely coincide, as relations of presence, that is, local face-to-face interactions, dominate social life for most people. Thus pre-modern locales are the geographically situated ‘local’ contexts for nearly all social interactions. However, modernity tears space away from place in that it allows and indeed fosters relations at distance between people who are not united in the face-to-face presence of a locale.

It is this above all that makes modernity inherently globalizing. Consequently, globalization has only broadened the scope of the disembedding process of modernity, so that, “larger and larger numbers of people live in circumstance in which disembedded institutions, linking local practices with the globalized social relations, organize major aspects of day-to-day life” (ibid., p.70). However, this does not simply mean that place (locale) has ceased to be significant in the organization of everyday life, but rather that as social connections extend laterally across time and space localities around the world become less dependent on circumstances of co-presence, or face-

71 to-face interaction, and more on interactions across distance or on relations with absent others. It is in relation to the spatio-temporal change that Giddens views globalization, defining it as

expressing fundamental aspects of time-space distanciation. Globalization concerns the intersection of presence and absence, the interlacing of social events and social relations at a distance. It can be defined as the intensification of worldwide social relations which link distant localities in such a way that local happenings are shaped by events occurring many miles away and vice versa (ibid., p.64).

In so far as globalization means distanciation of time and space, it is, according to Giddens, exactly in the age of modernity that the notions of time and space are reconsidered. Globalization not only expands time and space horizons, it also binds them by linking distant places and creating higher interconnectedness. By increasing the scope of social life and the intensifying social changes it stretches and deepens social transformations. This is what has engendered the transition from pre- modernity to modernity and subsequently from modernity to post-modernity. As it were, pre- modern time was always linked with space, while with the new technological inventions prompting the advent of modernity, time became separated from space. In addition,

in conditions of modernity, place becomes increasingly phantasmagoric - locales are penetrated by and shaped in terms of social influences quite distant from them. It is the separation of time and space that drives modernity and their recombination in new forms permit the precise time-space “zoning” of social life, the disembedding of social systems and the reflexive ordering and reordering of social relations (ibid., p.19).

Modernity comes into being through a change in the perception of time and space brought about by the new technological inventions. Time is no longer the cyclic pre-modern time, and space is no more constructed and arranged by forces out of the human reach. Instead, time becomes linear and space is open to be explored. It is the opening of spatio-temporal horizon that leads to an expansion of people’s worldview and to disembeddedness or replacements of institutions by “lifting out” social relations from local contexts of interaction and actively restructuring them across spans of space and time. It is this sort of broad transformation that Giddens uses to argue that time-space distanciation marks a discontinuity with the pre-modern world and simultaneously globalizes the epochal shift.

Tomlinson (1999) also views globalization as the continuation of a long historical process of Western ‘imperialist’ expansion - embracing the colonial expansions of the 16th to the 19th centuries - and representing an historical pattern of increasing global cultural hegemony (pp. 143- 144). The world is gradually being made over in the image of the West, with cultural diversity disappearing as non-Western cultures are progressively incorporated into a Western-dominated homogenized culture. As he writes:

The ramification here is that western culture has been globalized to such an extent that the west has lost its natural connection to a specific geographical territory. The west is no longer an assemblage of cultural practices linked to a particular territorial foundation. It has been deterritorialized, uprooted from its historical birthplace. As such, the west no longer refers simply to Europe. It names instead a worldwide cultural formation. It designates a machine of sorts, one producing planetary unification, one ushering in the worldwide standardization of lifestyles. The west describes, in short, the cultural condition of the world. It is simply everywhere, dooming the world to uniformity (1999, p.144).

Asserted above, globalization is portrayed as involving the installation of worldwide Western versions of basic social-cultural reality: the West’s epistemological and ontological theories, its values, ethical systems, approach to rationality, technical scientific worldview and political culture. In other words, globalization entails the dissemination of all facets of the West’s way of being, from musical forms, architecture, and modes of dress to eating habits, languages, philosophical ideas, and cultural values and dispositions. These concern, for example, freedom, democracy, gender and sexuality, human rights, religion, science and technology. Within the discourse of modernity, culture in large part becomes an organizing principle that is used in constructing borders that reproduce relations of domination, subordination and inequality. This means that the borders that have been created within the culture of modernity do not offer individuals the possibility of experiencing and positioning themselves within a productive exchange of cultural differences. Instead, within the cultural politics of modernism, European culture becomes identified with the centre of civilization. As Beck, Giddens and Lash (2003) argue:

Modernity has not vanished, we are not past it. Radical social change has always been part of modernity. What is new is that modernity has begun to modernize its own foundations. It has become directed at itself.

According to Beck et al., the new problems, both in reality and in theory, arise from the fundamental turn in flow of modernist energy. The relative orderly world of high modernism has yielded to what they refer to as the “second modernity”.

Reflexive modernization means the possibility of a creative (self-) destruction for an entire epoch: that of industrial society. The subject of this creative destruction is not the revolution, not the crisis, but the victory of western modernization (ibid., p.2).

The conclusion that can be drawn from this stance is that Western modernization is in the process of reshaping itself and creating a new order, which is reflexive modernization. This new order is the creative product of modernization itself, producing a new kind of capitalism, labour, global order, society, nature, subjectivity, everyday life and state (ibid., p.2).

Seeing modernity as a very long, uneven and complicated process relates to what Robertson (1992) describes as ‘global unicity’, however this does not imply a simplistic uniformity, but rather it reflects a complex social and phenomenological condition, in which different orders of human life are brought into articulation with one another, that is, individual human beings, national societies, the world system societies and the interaction between these orders increasingly positioned against and forced to take account of each other. Reflecting on contemporary economic protectionism he argues that:

Compared to the older protectionisms of the 18th and 19th centuries, the new ones are more self-consciously situated within a globe wide system of global rules and regulations concerning economic trade and a consciousness of the global economy as a whole. This certainly does not mean that protectionism will be overcome by such factors but it does mean that relevant parties, including ‘average citizens’ are increasingly constrained to think in terms, not necessarily favourable terms of the world as a whole (1992, p.26).

For Robertson, globalization refers both to the “compression of the world and the intensification of consciousness of the world as a whole” (p.25). Its essential character resides in the awareness that the world is an arena in which all participate. Robertson’s compression of the world clarifies the way that interdependencies are being created in the economies of the world. The way people live their lives on one side of the globe has immediate consequences for the others on the other side. Although world compression is not a new idea, global unicity increasingly determines social relations and, simultaneously, a frame of reference within which social agents develop a consciousness on which they draw to understand increasingly their existence, identities and actions.

Proceeding from this logic, Robertson states that

the overall process of globalization can best be treated in terms of what may be called a “voluntaristic theory”, implying that the global system is not reducible to a scene consisting merely of societies and/or large-scale actors. Individuals, societies, the system of societies and the humankind are to be treated in terms of one coherent analytical framework and the global cultural pluralism is itself a constitutive feature of the contemporary global circumstances (p.61).

The importance that Robertson places on cultural pluralism directs attention both at particularity and difference, at heterogeneity and homogeneity. It is based on a reality that is socially constructed and can be classified through what is happening to the frames of meaning in people’s everyday lives. In his view, there is a need to grasp the nature of the new age, in order to make sense of the new experience and be able to link individual fates to historical change. He further argues that:

The reason globalization ushers in a new age is not that it challenges the axial ideas of modernity. Rather it signifies the disruption of all those conditions, which made axial ideas central. Globalization undermines the assumption that the nation-state can provide the dominant frame of meaning for the lives of its citizens, that advancing rationality means advancing control of nature, that western rationality is inherently superior. It emphasizes the material finitude of the globe and its resources and at the same time multiplies social relationships. It replaces universal ideas with a material globality. In other words the global shift is the arrival of a new configuration of both human activities and conditions of existence (1999, p.106).

5.3 GLOBALIZATION AS A CONFIGURATION OF THE GLOBAL AND LOCAL

Globalization has radically pulled culture apart from place, visibly dislodging it from particular locales and creating a world where cultural subjects and objects, that is, meaningful forms such as capital, people, commodities, images, and ideas, have become unhinged from particular localities. As culture has become highly mobile and deterritorialized there has been a general weakening of the ties between it and place. Cultural objects and subjects are dislodged from particular or fixed locations in space and time and cultural processes are viewed as capable of transcending specific territorial boundaries. Globalization designates a world of things fundamentally in motion, though Gupta and Ferguson (2002) argue that this should not be taken to mean that anthropologists now think of culture as free floating, without anchors. For anthropologists, cultural flows do not just float ethereally across the globe but are always reinscribed in specific environments. While the connection between culture and specific places may be weakening it does not mean that culture has altogether lost its place, but rather it signifies that culture has been placed otherwise, and has a territorialized existence, albeit a rather unstable one. The extensity, intensity and rapidity of the global cultural flows overlap all boundaries, thus connecting and mingling different cultures. This persistent cultural interaction and exchange produce cultural homogeneity and disorder. As Ulf Hannerz puts it:

There is now a world culture, but we had better make sure we understand what this means. It is marked by an organization of diversity rather than by a replication of uniformity. No total homogenization of systems of meaning and expression has occurred, nor does it appear likely that there will be one for some time soon. But the world has become one network of social relationships, and between its different regions there is a flow of meanings as well as a flow of people and goods (1990, p.237).

From the above assertions it is reasonable to argue that globalization has resulted in the integration and networking of cultural practices and experiences across the world. Cultures are developing

75 without a clear anchorage in any one territory and are all becoming sub-cultures within the wider whole. However, the situation cannot be distinguished as compromising a global culture with a single homogenized system of meaning, but it suggests that cultures rather than being easily separated from one another tend to overlap and mingle. In line with this, Held et al. (2000) argue that while the processes of globalization may be uniting the globe physically, it is not necessarily inculcating a sense of global community and citizenship. Rather, the homogenous global culture that is being promoted has increased cultural diversity; hence, globalization is marked by an organization of diversity rather than by a replication of uniformity. It can be thought of as:

… a process (or set of processes), which embodies a transformation in the spatial organization of social relations and transactions - assessed in terms of their extensity, intensity, velocity and impact-generating transcontinental or interregional flows and networks of activity, interaction, and the exercise of power (Held et al., p.68).

The result is that it is no longer easy to conform to the ideal type of the local, given the influx of meanings as well as of people and goods. There is an increased inter-connectedness of various local cultures and the development of cultures without a clear anchorage in any one territory, which leads to what one would term a global interconnected diversity. However, this does not mean that the global has displaced the local or that it takes precedence over local, national and regional orders of social life; rather it implies that the local has been embedded within more expansive sets of interregional relations. However, the assumption that goods, on entering another culture, will inevitably retain and communicate the values they are accorded by their culture of origin must be questioned, and it is a grave mistake to treat people as receptacles of cultural products because reflexivity, in the form of people’s perceptions, usually intervenes. How individuals react to cultural products will vary and there is unlikely to be a uniform response.

Similarly, Cvertkovich and Kellner (1997) see contemporary Western consumer culture as marked by a diversity that is increasingly operating on a new global scale:

Consumer and media industries are becoming more differentiated and are segmenting their customers and audiences into more categories. In many cases this involves the simulation of minor differences of fashion and style as significant but it also involves a proliferation of more highly differentiated culture and society in terms of an ever expanding variety and diversity of cultural artefacts, products and services (p.9).

The point has also been made by Axford (1999), who argues that the global is received in different locals and it is unlikely that there can ever be, for instance, an homogenous global television audience. He cites the example of the British televised ‘soap’, EastEnders, as being ‘received’ and ‘read’ differently when watched in London, Rio or Madras. Similarly, McDonald’s and Coca-Cola are vehicles for potential cultural globalization, but while these products are consumed around the

76 world, their reception is ‘localised’ and made sense of through local world views and cultural practices. Therefore, the discourse of cultural imperialism relies on what Morley and Robins (1995, p.126) refer to as the ‘hypodermic model’ of media effects; a model that presupposes that media texts have direct cultural effects on those who view them. Cultural effects are imputed from an examination of the cultural forms themselves rather than from careful attention to the actual context of viewing. They argue that Third World consumers faced with an imported text, media or otherwise, will not simply or necessarily absorb its ideologies, values, and life-style positions, but rather they will bring their own cultural codes. What takes place in the encounter is that foreign cultural forms have a tendency to become customized. They are interpreted, translated, and appropriated according to local conditions of reception.

Drawing on the view, it is possible to argue that the world is dislocated to the extent that there is not just one global cultural power centre but also a plurality of them, even if the West stands out amongst them. In other words, the world can be thought of as a dislocated cultural space insofar as global cultural power has ceased to be concentrated in the west. This would be a space that would not be seen as a representation of some material state to which power can be attributed. For example, in Hoffman’s (1998) view , a view of culture is ‘essentialised’ would undermine the importance of the ‘fuzzy areas’ created by the mutual interference and inter-dependency that would be characteristic of such a space. Such essentialisation would promote a view of culture as having a history that disregards the interference and inter-dependence that constitutes its complexity of culture. Therefore, culture in the sense referred to in the chapter is about the meanings and values underpinning social and other interaction. It underscores the importance of the middle-ground that lies between cultural traits often associated with what is observed or experienced at a concrete level (cf. Hoffman, 1996, pp.545-569). Hence, there is a need to view globalization not as a Western project but as a global one. However, Rizri (2000) claims that the kind of homogenization witnessed under colonialism is different from the current forms of cultural globalization. Globalization is more complex and affects people and nations in a variety of different ways that are both asymmetrical and contingent. In his words:

… it has a commercial dimension that makes it sensitive to the needs of both markets and clients. It is sensitive to difference and preaches the need to respond to local needs. It has a culturally interactive disposition, even to the point of commodifying difference, constructing it so it can be sold in terms of a language of diversity and multiculturalism (2000, p.222).

On a global level the situation is becoming increasingly pluralistic.

The intensification of global “time/space compression” through the universalising processes of the new communications technology would thus imply that local cultures inevitably give way. As Featherstone argues:

Our experiences and means of orientation necessarily become divorced from the physical locations in which we live and work. The fate of our places of residence and work is seen as in the hands of unknown agencies in other parts of the world. Localism and a sense of place gives way to the anonymity of ‘no place spheres’, or simulated environments in which we are unable to feel an adequate sense of being at home (1995, p.102).

On the one hand globalization implies a tendency to uniformity by making the world more like a single unity. On the other hand there is also a tendency for particularization striving to place each culture and identity in their local context. Hence, it cannot be directed only at cultural unification and homogeneity, because even though it enables flows of goods, capital, people and information across many boundaries, there is a backlash from the natural cultures in their attempt to preserve their particularities. When local cultures are integrated in the global mass culture their specifications seem to be obliterated. In this case, global mass culture resembles a split of different cultures, which are absorbed and given a common universalized form. Global culture is not so unitary, but is a patchwork of various local traits and identities. Indigenization is the other side of homogenizing aspects of globalization, as the local and the global intertwine, forming a web in which both elements are transformed as a result of their own interconnectedness. Globalization expresses itself through the tensions between the forces of the global and those of the cultural. Nevertheless, homogenizing globalization brings about heterogenization as well. These two processes overlap and set up a global culture, which people draw on to define their own local culture.

The conclusion that can be drawn from this is that people cannot posses natural relations of narrowly defined allegiances. Even though these relations might be compulsory, and involve a strong sense of inclusiveness based on natural criteria such as bloodlines or descent, locality, residence and nation, there is a growing trend toward post-colonial definitions. Consequently the self-definition and identity of individuals is increasingly independent of any single collective situation in which they might be framed. This does pose a problem especially in a situation where people are expected to change, have the same vision towards nation-building and among others be patriotic citizens.

But Nietzsche (1999) has argued that cultural logics do not mix harmoniously in an instant. On the contrary, what usually strikes us most forcefully at first is their incompatibility, their irreducibility and the ways in which they contradict each other. Yet, if contradictory cultural elements are forced to coexist, and forced to interact, they will over time evolve into a way of life. An indispensable

78 part of any such solution will be a learned ability to translate from one culture to another. Thus, when driven past a certain point, the age of comparison turns into the age of cultural translation. In both cases, contradictions that have long been present in the world, but have previously only been put into intellectual relation to each other, now come into close proximity and real relation. They contradict each other inside individuals and localities. They live those contradictions and are forced to come up with makeshift solutions to resolve them. These solutions are the new social relations, the new lived experiences made conscious. It is this new background that makes new solutions visible, not only to the immediate problems of our own lives and identities, but also to the political, economic and scientific problems that face us collectively.

Michael Billig (1995) has dubbed this process “banal nationalism.” The traditional notion of single, separate and homogenous cultures embedded in ethnic folklore is now completely unacceptable. Societies today are consciously constructed and continuously reinvented; their membership is voluntary and may be impermanent so that continuity is not guaranteed. Membership no longer needs to be only or even mainly based on direct, face-to-face interactions. Instead, societies today are further influenced by the shifting nature of culture that is the de-linking between locality and culture. Under globalized conditions, locality has become highly problematic.

The traditional unifier of the modern era, the nation, is now under siege, first by the despatialization of social relations and second by what Appadurai (1995) calls the separation of spatial and visual neighbourhoods. De-spatialization processes have dispersed, displaced, mixed and brought into conjunction, whether in harmony or conflict, disparate cultures and peoples across regions, nations and continents. As the incidence of virtual neighbourhoods across the world grows it will be increasingly possible for their members to create more effective national and global strategies of self-representation and cultural survival. Such processes of de-localization create numerous uncertainties as well as possible permutations in terms of different kinds of social relationships. People may live in local isolation with respect to some groups as if they existed on different planets, but they may enjoy social nearness and closeness to others living thousands of miles away, so merging into a single social space. The view has implications for education because in the circumstances describe above, knowledge production will occur in different stages of people’s development and operation. Whilst some teachers and learners will exhibit generally rudimentary forms of cultural skills in their interactions with each other and school knowledge others will demonstrate an understanding of the complexity of distance between themselves and others when they act. As Giroux, 1997, p.112) has pointed out as regards the latter:

by linking schooling to wider social movements, teachers can begin to redefine the nature and importance of pedagogical struggle and in doing so provide the basis to fight for forms of emancipatory authority as a foundation for the establishment of freedom and justice

The discussion presented here implies that society has to be the outcome of protracted processes of contacts and mixing, in the course of which people coming from different cultural areas blend and produce an original culture that promotes freedom and justice for everyone. If this is the case, then Kenya cannot be viewed as a construct of people with their own culture. Therefore, building nationhood demands a radical transformation in understanding representations that would bring about democratic ways of interacting and development amongst her society. The next chapter looks at what these transformation and democratic practices imply conceptually. In particular, it looks at, amongst others, the views of Mouffe on democratic deliberation as a basis for understanding oneself and others to identify what would be crucial to the ideals Kenya hopes to achieve by teaching History at the secondary school level.

CHAPTER 6

DEMOCRATIC DELIBERATION AS A BASIS FOR UNDERSTANDING THE SELF AND THE OTHER

6.1 INTRODUCTION

According to Tully (2001) the form of culturally diverse democracy that will be both free and stable in the 21st century is one in which the prevailing rules of recognition are always open to challenge and modification by the diverse members, on the grounds that any set of rules will harbour dimensions of injustice and non recognition. He pleads for a model that places the question of power and antagonism at the centre. In his view it is such a culturally democratic model that is able to clarify the nature of the political. Such (see pp.6–7). In their book Hegemony and Socialist Strategy, Laclau and Mouffe (1985) argue that objectivity of this nature is constituted through acting on power. For them the point of convergence between objectivity and power manifests “hegemony”, therefore power should be conceived not as an external relation taking place between two pre-constituted identities, but rather as constituting the identities themselves. Since any political order is the expression of a hegemony, of a specific pattern of power relations, political practice cannot be envisaged as simply representing the interests of pre-constituted identities. Rather, it constitutes those identities themselves in a precarious and always vulnerable terrain:

to assert the hegemonic nature of any kind of social order is to operate a displacement of the traditional relation between democracy and power… the more democratic a society is, the less power would be constitutive of social relations. But if we accept that relations of power are constitutive of the social, then the main question for democratic politics is not how to eliminate power but how to constitute forms of power more compatible with democratic values (ibid.).

This implies that any social objectivity is ultimately political and that it has to deal with traces of the exclusion that governs its constitution.

Dealing with the constitutive nature of power implies relinquishing the ideal of a democratic society as the realization of a perfect harmony or transparency. Such action can only be based on accepting that social actors should assume ‘mastery’ of the foundation. Democratic social relations have to be purely pragmatic to claim power and legitimacy. Only when this is the case can there be grounds for rationality. This explains why Mouffe (2005) is of the view that the idea that power could be dissolved through a rational debate and that legitimacy could be based on pure rationality are illusions which can endanger democratic institutions. In her view, human coexistence is always potentially conflictual because of “the political”. In her words; “it is only when we acknowledge

81 the dimension of “the political” and understand that “politics” consists in domesticating hostility and in trying to defuse the potential antagonism that exists in human relations that we can pose what I take to be the central question for democratic politics. … question is not how to arrive at a consensus without exclusion, since this would imply the eradication of the political. Politics aims at the creation of unity in a context of conflict and diversity; it is always concerned with the creation of an “us” by the determination of a “them” (pp. 8-9 ).

Overcoming the us/them opposition is possible through discrimination that is compatible with pluralist democracy. Constructing ‘them’ in such a way that does not reflect animosity or an enemy to be destroyed, but an ‘adversary’, i.e., somebody whose ideas we combat but whose right to defend those ideas we do not put into question, promotes what she refers to as an “agonistic pluralism”, reflected through democratic tolerance. Such tolerance does not involve condoning ideas that we oppose or being indifferent to standpoints with which we disagree, but a treatment of those who defend them as legitimate opponents. Understood in this manner, “adversary” does not eliminate antagonism and is distinguishable from the liberal notion of the competitor with which it is sometimes identified. An adversary is an enemy, but a legitimate enemy, one with whom we have some common ground because we have a shared adhesion to the ethico-political principles of liberal democracy: liberty and equality; but disagree on the meaning and implementation of those principles. The disagreement is not one that could be resolved through deliberation and rational discussion but through providing channels through which collective passions will be given ways to express themselves over issues. The aim will be to eliminate passions from the sphere of the public, in order to render a rational consensus possible, but to mobilize those passions towards democratic designs. However, according to Mouffe (2005), the trouble with deliberative democracy, and with liberalism more generally, is that they try to evade ‘the political’. Their morality invites intransigence, their rationalism denigrates the passions, their quest for consensus denies the tendency to antagonism, and their search for final answers flies in the face of value pluralism. Mouffe adds to this list the pretence of ‘neutrality’ offered by much contemporary liberalism and deliberative theory, according to which key claims are said to be neutral among rival conceptions of the good, that is, independent of any particular view of how life should be lived, and consequently acceptable to people from any way of life.

One of the key theses of agonistic pluralism is that, far from compromising democracy, agonistic confrontation is itself a manifestation of its existence. The recognition and legitimation of conflict and refusal to suppress it by imposing an authoritarian order, acknowledges the pluralism of values that cause disenchantment in the world. Therefore, a well functioning democracy calls for a vibrant clash of democratic political positions. If this is missing there is a danger that the confrontation will be replaced by apathy and disaffection with political participation. Worse still, the result can

82 be the crystallization of collective passions around issues, which cannot be managed by the democratic process, and an explosion of antagonism that can tear up the very basis of civility.

It is for that reason that the ideal of a pluralist democracy cannot be to reach a rational consensus in the public sphere. Such a consensus exists only as a temporary result of a provisional hegemony, as a stabilization of power, and always entails some form of exclusion.

By advocating the availability of a non-exclusive public sphere of deliberation where a rational consensus could be obtained, Mouffe and Laclau (1985) negated the inherently conflictual nature of modern pluralism. They are unable to recognize that bringing a deliberation to a close always results from a decision which excludes other possibilities, and for which one should not refuse to bear responsibility by invoking the commands of general rules or principles. This is why, in their view, a perspective like “agonistic pluralism”, which reveals the impossibility of establishing a consensus without exclusion, is of fundamental importance for democratic politics.

6.2 ACKNOWLEDGING ‘THE POLITICAL’

By warning us of the illusion that a fully achieved democracy could ever be instantiated, Mouffe and Laclau (1985) force us to keep the democratic contestation alive. For them it is important to make room for dissent and to foster the idea that there could ever be a time in which it would cease. An ‘agonistic’ approach acknowledges the real nature of the limitations of democratic politics and the forms of exclusion that it entails, instead of trying to disguise them under the veil of rationality or morality.

Asserting the hegemonic nature of social relations and identities can contribute to recognizing the multiple voices that exist in contemporary societies, the complexity of their power structures, the multiplicity of voices that contemporary pluralist societies encompass and the complexity of their power structure. Agonistic democracy faces up to this reality and channels it in non-destructive ways to achieve, in Mouffe’s (2005) words, “rational consensus through free discussion” (p.13).

Different deliberative theorists give somewhat different accounts of public and fair conditions of dialogue or deliberation, the principle versions being those of Habermas’s (1984) ‘ideal speech situation’ and Rawls’s (1996) idea of ‘public reason’. What the views have in common is a basic commitment to including in the discussion as great a range of voices as possible, requiring all participants to give one another a respectful and even generous hearing, and to insist that the participants be prepared not only to assert but also to justify their views, and then in terms accessible to the other participants. However, Mouffe (2005) sees this inclusion as “a space of power, conflict and antagonism” (ibid., p. 9). For her there are several dimensions to the reality being denied by these views, the first of which is the fundamental role of power, the second, the

83 idea of antagonism, which Mouffe, drawing on Schmitt (1996), describes as a deep-seated natural human tendency to ‘antagonism’, or an urge to separate into mutually opposed camps of ‘friend versus enemy’, ‘us versus them’. This is what gives antagonism “the political” (ibid., p.8) as its essence.

Value pluralism lies behind Schmitt’s doctrine of ‘decisionism’, according to which political conflicts cannot strictly be resolved, but rather are decided by an act of arbitrary will. Schmitt goes on to use this doctrine to defend the principle of dictatorship in general and the Nazi führerprinzip in particular. Mouffe, however, sees decisionism, and the value pluralism with which she associates it, as a basis for democratic theory. Her first step in this direction is to deploy these ideas against deliberative democracy and liberalism, agreeing with Schmitt that liberal deliberation is too ‘rationalistic’, and too oriented to consensus, to accommodate the deep plurality of values.

Third, there is behind the notion of antagonism the still deeper idea of ‘value pluralism’, which Mouffe takes from Max Weber (1948). For Weber, the modern ‘disenchantment’ of the world means the abandonment of the pre-modern notion of an objective and harmonious moral order. Instead, we see ourselves as creating our own values and as choosing among them without objective guidance when they conflict. Consequently our moral choices are fundamentally subjective, and non-rational.

In Weber’s sense, there will always be conflict and there can be no final, correct answer to the question of how the conflict ought to be resolved: such conflict will be ‘undecidable’ (Mouffe, 2000, p.103), and people will always disagree about them. Moreover, they will disagree not just as a matter of rational argumentation but also passionately. This is a weakness in liberal rationalism, which according to Mouffe (2005), ignores “the affective dimension” of the political (p.6). For her, the realities of antagonism and value pluralism show that there can be no such neutral territory: “The domain of politics – even when fundamental issues like justice or basic principles are concerned – is not a neutral terrain that could be insulated from the pluralism of values and where rational, universal solutions could be formulated” (Mouffe 2000, p. 92). To attempt to evade this truth is both unrealistic and dangerous, because political conflict is likely to manifest itself with greater violence if it is not allowed proper outlets.

What does Mouffe propose as an alternative? Her preferred democratic model gives due recognition to the tendency to antagonism and the value of pluralism underlying it. This is her ‘agonistic’ model of democracy, the main feature of which is the centrality and permanence of conflict in political life. Against the consensus and harmony that Mouffe associates with the liberals and deliberators, agonism regards political struggle as ‘ineradicable’ (2000, p.105). Struggle is also a positive value, since it is a ‘condition’ for real democracy, and it is only where partisan political combat is allowed to express itself that ‘the political’ sphere is alive and healthy.

Mouffe also stresses the hegemonic nature of political conflict, which is fundamentally a contest for the power to determine what counts as ‘legitimate’, from this view what is simply ‘successful power’ (2000, p.100). Unlike the liberal and deliberative ideal, agonism does not try to eliminate or diminish power, since power is inescapable and ‘constitutive’ of one’s very identity. Rather, the goal of agonistic politics is to ‘constitute’ or ‘mobilize’ power in a democratic way, that is, to empower a multiplicity of democratic voices to enter the struggle for hegemony. The same principle applies to the passions, which must be mobilized rather than subordinated to reason, as in the liberal-deliberative view. Another contrast with that view is that the hegemony that is the goal of agonism cannot be a truth that is “fixed once and for all” (Mouffe 2000, p.93), but rather a ‘provisional’ settlement that is always contested, and that holds only as long as people are prepared to maintain their allegiance to it.

At this stage one might suspect that Mouffe is offering a recipe for ‘might-is-right’ anarchy, to which she would reply that she is not advocating ‘a total pluralism’, and that “some limits need to be put to the kind of confrontation which is going to be seen as legitimate in the public sphere” (ibid.). These limits are, of course, ‘political’ in nature rather than moral or rational. The key limit is recognition that “the aim of democratic politics is to transform antagonism into agonism” (2000, p.103). Schmittian antagonism is a conflict between enemies who seek each other’s destruction, but ‘agonism’ is conflict between ‘adversaries’ who oppose one another but who also regard each other as holding ‘legitimate’ views and a shared adhesion to the ethico-political principles of liberal democracy: liberty and equality (2000, p.102): “This is the real meaning of liberal- democratic tolerance.”

To summarize, Mouffe’s agonistic model of democracy seeks “a vibrant clash of democratic political positions” (2000, p.104), emphasising permanent conflict rather than consensus, the primacy of power over morality, hegemony rather than consent, and the passions rather than reason. At the same time it seeks to ‘defuse’ or ‘tame’ antagonism (2000, p.101; 2005, pp. 19,20), converting it into agonism, which involves respect for the freedom and equality of persons and toleration for the expression of their views even if one opposes them. The tendency to antagonism must be acknowledged as permanent, but it can and should be channelled into a less destructive but still vigorous form of struggle that is characteristic of ‘the political’.

Indeed, Mouffe’s emphasis on hegemony suggests that the net practical effect of agonism will be not so much liberal as conservative. If our values are no more than expressions of dominant power formations, then even the most radical normative alternatives we could imagine must be in some way complicit with existing structures. On this reading, the hegemonic approach, far from enabling a more radical questioning of the status quo, actually imprisons us within it. In this respect, Mouffe is open to a familiar criticism of structuralist and post-structuralist theory. The point is well made by Habermas (1981, p.13), for example, who aptly describes this kind of theory (associated with

Foucault and Derrida) as, despite its typically radical pretensions, fundamentally ‘neoconservative’ in its political implications. Once ethics has been reduced to a function of power, the net result is to play into the hands of those who possess power already, and to rob the powerless of their best weapons: appeals to reason and justice. The upshot of Mouffe’s supposedly radical form of democracy is that it is likely to resemble nothing so much as the aggregative or ‘interest-group’ form of liberal democracy that is currently dominant, that is, the pursuit of economic and sectarian interests within a framework of basic liberal-democratic values. One explanation is that she thinks that only struggle at the level of hegemony is sufficiently radical to challenge existing relations of power and inequality. Another is that she sees ‘moralism’ as leading to antagonism rather than agonism, because it turns ‘the we/they confrontation’ into ‘one between good and evil’ in which ‘the opponent can be perceived only as an enemy to be destroyed’. But why should framing the debate in terms of power and interests be any less antagonistic in potential than framing the debate in moral terms?

The history of class and ethnic warfare is not encouraging in this respect. Conversely, must moral debate be seen as antagonistic? It is true that moral debate is sometimes understood by the participants in terms of ‘good vs. evil’, but that need not be the case. Argument on ethical grounds is compatible with seeing one’s opponent as simply mistaken, or as not appreciating the whole picture, either of which is, in turn, compatible with Mouffe’s notion of the adversary, and therefore with ‘the political’.

Political positions rely on essentialist claims, because they propose norms that imply conceptions of human nature and the human good. Mouffe’s own position is no exception. Since she sees the antagonistic dimension of the political is an essential element of human nature, it is less likely that she regards antagonism as an element of the human good. For her, antagonism cannot none other but undesirable. Instead she considers agonism as a universal value, describes its denial as “fraught with political dangers” (2005, pp.230) and its presence as necessary for a political system to be “well-functioning” (2000, p.104).

Mouffe is working with quite specific background conceptions of human nature and the human good. Her emphasis on the natural tendency of groups of human beings to enter into violent competition with other groups, demonstrates an acknowledgement of the human potential for freedom and equality and places active political participation at the centre of a healthy collective life,. It is to her not only unavoidable but also a cause for celebration. It is in this sense that deliberative democrats see democratic participation as transformative. Through public discussion with a plurality of differently opinionated and situated others, people often gain new information, learn of different experiences of their collective problems or find that their own initial opinions are founded on prejudice or ignorance, or that they have misunderstood the relations of their own interests to others. This vision of democracy fosters enlightened understanding among citizens

86 because it embodies the principle of reciprocity (Gutmann & Thompson, 1996) or the dispositions of reasonabless (Young, 2000).

Gutmann and Thompson argue that reciprocity entails mutual respect, which is a form of agreeing to disagree. It consists in an excellence of character that permits a democracy to flourish in the face of fundamental moral disagreement. This is a distinctively deliberative kind of character, that of individuals who are morally committed and self-reflective about their commitments. Discerning of the difference between respectable and merely tolerable differences of opinion, it opens up the possibility of changing their minds or modifying their positions at some time in the future, if they confront unanswerable objections to their present point of view (Gutmann & Thompson, 1996, pp.79-80). By engaging in deliberation with those with whom we disagree, we are expressing a willingness to listen to others, to take their concerns seriously and to find some common ground so that a just compromise can be achieved. Mutual respect does not mean that we must always accept the claims of those we disagree with, but it does require that we listen to their concerns and justify our decisions by appealing to reasons we genuinely believe all reasonable persons could accept. By seeking terms of agreement that are acceptable to all, the deliberative model of democracy secures criteria for democracy, that is, effective participation and enlightened understanding. Emphasis is placed on searching for a consensus, being open-minded and respecting, even accommodating one’s opponent’s position. To participate in the consensus-building process envisioned by deliberative democrats is to engage in a transformative process.

Deliberative democracy proposes models of participation committed to the public deliberative processes that are essential to the rationality of collective decision-making in diverse societies. These features of deliberative democracy provide touchstones for current conceptions of citizenship (Enslin et al., 2001) that Kenya seeks. Thus, the following sections examine and addresses a discussion of three models of deliberative democracy: public reason, as exemplified by John Rawls; discursive democracy as exemplified by Seyla Benhabib; and communicative democracy as exemplified by Iris Young.

6.2.1 Public reason

Politically, the desirability of deliberative democracy stems from the central role it accords to reason and justification. Given the fact of pluralism, legitimate decision-making in the interests of inclusion must meet certain constraints over and above those motivated by standard liberal concerns, if it is to ensure that citizens are treated as equals. These restrictions delimit a publicly recognized point of view from which citizens can fulfil their duty of civility by examining, before one another, whether their institutions are just, and citing their publicly recognized and shared

87 reasons. Cohen (1996) draws a compelling picture of what reasoning together in this delimited sphere might be like:

In an idealized deliberative setting, it will not do simply to advance reason that one takes to be true or compelling: such considerations may instead be rejected by others who are themselves reasonable. One must find instead reasons that are compelling to others, acknowledging those others as equals, aware that they have alternative reasonable commitments, and knowing something about the kinds of commitments that they are likely to have…if a consideration does not meet these tests, that will suffice for rejecting it as a reason. If it does, then it counts as an acceptable political reason (p.100).

Reasonability is, for Rawls (1993), primarily conceived of as a virtue of the person who exhibits it by readiness to propose and abide by standards and principles of cooperation and by willingness to recognize the burdens of judgment. Citizens, according to Rawls, manifest the moral sensibility of the reasonable which crucially involves the ability to have desires of a special kind, namely conception-dependent. The ideal of citizenship specified by Rawls involves in particular the conception-dependent desire to be able to justify one’s actions to others on grounds they could not reasonably reject. Reasonable persons accept that the burdens of judgement set limits on what they can justify to others. In this sense citizens need to have a reasonable moral psychology. They are fully autonomous in their public life since they not only comply with principles of justice but also act from these principles. This political autonomy is further realized by participation in public affairs leading to sharing in collective self-determination. Thus, being reasonable is not entirely an epistemological idea, but rather it is part of a political ideal of democratic citizenship that includes the idea of public reason.

The manner of deliberation required of public reason involves a commitment to rational norms of conversation. Public reason mobilizes conversational constraint or selective repression, specifying what types of reasons citizens may or may not adduce to defend their points of view. In this manner, legitimacy is established through dialogue, which Rawls (1996) argues should be constrained, neutral, confined to those propositions on which all groups happen to agree, and should shun issues that provoke disagreement. Ultimately, the limitations imposed on reason are justified because they are necessary to safeguard basic rights and liberties, and to advance significant values. However, constraints apply not only to manner but matter as well. Even though these restrictions may lead to silencing of debate about significant social and political issues, proponents of public reason insist that this is the opposite of what is intended. By allowing for opposing opinions to be set aside in a principled way, they argue that restraint makes it possible to agree to disagree, and so allow for the conversation to change tack and continue in a more productive way. More generally, it leads to the establishment of a point of view from which all citizens, regardless of their comprehensive doctrines, could view, criticize and endorse public

88 claims. In this way it provides the conditions for agreement allowing simultaneously for matters to be rationally decided and for their political legitimacy.

This is in accordance with Barber’s (1984) view on democracy:

The word reasonable bespeaks practicality. It suggests that persons in conflict have consented to resolve their differences in the absence of mediating common standards, to reformulate their problems in a way that encompasses their interest (newly and broadly conceived) even while it represents the community at large in a new way…Reasonable choices are generally public choices. That is to say, they are choices informed by an extension of perspective and by the reformulation of private interests in the setting of potential public goals. To be reasonable is therefore not to deny Self, but to place Self in the context of Other and to inform it with a sense of its dependence on the civic polity (p.127).

Democracy in this mode resolves conflict in the absence of an independent ground through a participatory process of ongoing, proximate self-legislation and the creation of a political community capable of transforming dependent private individuals into free citizens and practical and pure interests into public goods. It deals with public disputes and conflicts of interest by subjecting them to a never-ending process of deliberation, decision and action. Each step in the process is a flexible part of ongoing procedures that are embedded in concrete historical conditions and in social and economic actualities. This model of democracy relies on participation in an evolving problem-solving community that creates public interests where there were none before, by means of its own activity and existence as a focal point in the quest for mutual solutions. In this case, democracy seems potentiality capable of transcending the limitations of representation and the reliance on surreptitious independent grounds without giving up such defining democratic values as liberty, equality and social justice. Indeed, these values take on wider and fuller meaning for the strong democratic solution to the political condition issues, as a self-sustaining dialectic of participatory civic activity is nourished and given political being. Community grows out of participation and at the same time makes participation possible; civic activity educates individuals in how to think publicly as citizens even as citizenship informs civic activity with the required sense of publicness, and justice politics becomes its own university, citizenship its own training ground, and participation its own tutor. Freedom is what comes out of this process, not what goes into it.

For Barber, this universality of participation is essential, because ‘the Other’ is a construct that becomes real to an individual only when he/she encounters it directly in the political arena. He/she may confront it as an obstacle or approach it as ally, but it is an inescapable reality in the way of and on the way to common decision and common action. We also remain an abstraction when

89 individuals are represented either by politicians or as symbolic wholes. The term acquires a sense of concreteness and simple reality only when individuals redefine themselves as citizens and come together directly to resolve the conflict, to achieve a purpose or to implement a decision.

Strong democracy creates the very citizens it depends upon because it permits the representation neither of me nor of we, because it mandates a permanent confrontation between the me as citizens and the Other as citizen, forcing us to think in common and act in common. The citizen is by definition a we-thinker, and to think of the we is always to transform how interests are perceived and goods defined (ibid., p.153).

The argument regarding the fundamental idea of democratic legitimacy is that authorization to exercise state power must arise from the collective decisions of the members of a society who are governed by that power. Equating legitimacy with the outcome of an actual democratic process thus implies in practice what Benhabib describes as dependence on ‘discursive democracy’.

6.2.2 Discursive democracy

According to Benhabib (1996), the institutions of liberal democracies emphasize the importance of public deliberation about matters of common concern. The strength of such deliberation lies in the legitimacy generated by procedures of collective deliberation based on practical rationality. Legitimacy is largely a matter of reasoned agreement of all those affected and can only be secured by deliberative means. However, embodying practical rationality in procedures of public deliberation involves more than formal mechanisms of decision-making. For it to ensue from such deliberation, there is a need for commitment to strong egalitarianism. Only then can all participants have the same chance to initiate speech acts, to question, to interrogate, to open debate, to question assigned topics of conversation and to initiate reflexive arguments about rules of engagement/deliberation and the way they are carried out or applied. As long as each excluded person or group can justifiably show that they are relatively affected by the proposed norm under question, then there are no prima facie rules limiting the agenda of the conversation, or the identity of the participants. As Benhabib (1996, pp.73-74) explains:

It is through the interlocking net of these multiple forms of associations, networks, and organizations that an anonymous public conversation results. It is central to the model of deliberative democracy that it privileges such a public sphere of mutually interlocking and overlapping networks and associations of deliberation, contestation, and argumentation.

This principle contains a theory of political legitimacy as it proposes to consider as legitimate only those norms and institutions that would be validated by individuals who engage in a practical discourse, premised on mutual respect among the participants, recognition of the right to

90 participate, the right to initiate new topics and to ask for reflection about the presuppositions of the conversation. For Habermas (1987), it needs communicative action that serves:

... to transmit and renew cultural knowledge; under the aspect of coordinating action, ... social integration and the establishment of solidarity; finally under the aspect of socialization, ... the formation of personal identities (p.37).

However, Young (1996) argues that this way of conceiving legitimacy assumes that discussion either begins with shared understandings or takes a common good as its goal, that is, unity is either a starting point or a goal. By contrast, she proposes difference as a resource for reaching understanding in democratic discussion. This is crucial in circumstances of social and economic inequality among groups. Difference is an index of structural inequalities. As long as such unequal circumstances persist, a politics that aims to do justice through public discussion and decision- making must theorize and aim to practice a form of deliberation that acknowledges that difference is a reality in public discussion about common good (p.399). She does not reject deliberation but rather proposes a broadened theory of deliberative democracy, which accommodates a wider range of interactions among participants; namely, communicative democracy.

6.2.3 Communicative democracy

Communicative democracy is viewed by Young (1996) as more inclusive than the other models of deliberation. Its sphere is broad, public and has group representation. Group difference is a deliberative resource. Nevertheless, there are conditions for inclusion, such as normative, epistemic and attitudinal, which imply constraints on the manner and matter of deliberation. For example, in a public discussion about a collective action or public policy, people cannot simply say what they want. To be taken seriously, they must appeal to others by presenting their claims as ones that others ought to accept. However, being taken seriously is not just a matter of how one presents one’s own claims. Equally important is the way one listens to and appreciates the claims of others. Coming to appreciate other people’s point of view is closely linked to a willingness to transform one’s own preferences:

Unlike the interest based conception, communicative democracy emphasizes that people’s ideas about political questions often change when they interact with other people’s ideas and experience… In this process people’s own initial preferences are transformed from subjective to objective claims and the content of these preferences must also often change to make them publicly speakable, as claims of entitlement or what is right. People’s ideas about the solution to collective problems are also sometimes transformed by listening to and learning about the point of view of others (Young, 1996, p.125).

The difference between communicative and other deliberative models lies in their views on the possibility and value of unity. According to Young, the assumption that unity should be the starting point or the outcome of deliberation makes it difficult to accommodate transformation of the opinions of the participants because it may harbour another mechanism of exclusion. In situations where participants in discussion are differentiated by culture or social position, appeals to the common good are likely to favour the privileged and their definition of the common good. Instead, there is a need for procedural conditions for a minimal unity in which members of the polity are significantly interdependent and have formally equal respect for one another. This would be in the simple formal sense of willingness that all have a right to express their opinions and all ought to listen to and agree on the procedural rules of fair discussion. Far from precluding the possibility of agreement and understanding, this conception of unity is a precondition for rich democratic discussion, provided that difference is positively valued as a resource. Understanding is reached not by transcending what divides and differentiates but by speaking across differences to learn the partiality of one’s own perspective, to frame one’s claims in terms of appeals to justice, and to expand one’s social knowledge by expressing, questioning and challenging differently situated knowledge (p.128).

It is only by encouraging the expression of all the various and relevant social groups’ perspectives on an issue that political discussion can distinguish the truer and the better judgements from the rest, and produce the best solutions to collective problems and conflicts. Democracy as a process of practical reason has a normative and an epistemic function. As a result, deliberation across different social perspectives is meant not only to augment the available information but also to bring about transformation of the partial and parochial interests and ideas of each into a more reflective and objective judgement. Through communicative democracy, judgement is not made from a neutral point of view transcending particular perspectives, but from an understanding of one’s own perspective in relation to others in a wider context. This account brings out clearly the interdependence of tolerance and autonomy:

While not abandoning their own perspective, through listening across difference each position can come to understand something about the ways proposals and claims affect others differently situated. By internalising this mediated understanding of plural positions to some extent, participants gain a wider picture of the social processes in which their partial experience is embedded. This greater social objectivity increases their wisdom for arriving at just solutions to collective problems (Young 1996, p.128).

The next chapter looks at the research design that was used in this study to explore how Kenyan History teachers are able or not to nurture a mediated understanding of plural ethnic positions that are characteristic of the country. They are expected to devise teaching strategies for History that can enable their students to mediate individual cultural affiliations and develop a deeper

92 understanding of first, the ethnic interconnectedness that makes the people of Kenya as a nation and second, that even though in a secluded geo-political space, Kenyan people are part of the global community and their children need to be able to ‘speak across differences’ that exists in this community in their interactions with it.

CHAPTER 7

RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODOLOGY

7.1 INTRODUCTION

Curriculum theorists have emphasized the importance of understanding the principles that underpin objectives and need to be translated into learning materials and activities when designing lessons. Amongst others, Stenhouse (1975) has argued that the way in which curriculum objectives are mediated to learners is an important reflection of how practitioners understand disciplines within which they are teaching. Therefore, it was important that an investigation of how teachers understood curriculum objectives should go beyond a simple description of the materials and activities they used during lessons, to an understanding of how they translated the curriculum policy objectives in a manner that took into account key concepts and principles that underpin the subject content they teach. The stance heeds Carter and Doyle’s (1987) warning that the concepts and meaning attached to teachers’ practices cannot be inferred simply by observing what they do in their classrooms. There is a need to examine the disciplinary meanings they attach to such practices through discussions. With these insights in mind, it became important first to try out research methods and instruments so as to be able to choose the ones that would best capture the Kenyan secondary school Form One teachers’ understanding of the objectives of the History syllabus they had to teach, specifically, what it implied in practice to teach with the aim of promoting nationhood amongst students. The teachers were selected as they taught the syllabus that has nation-building as one of the topics to teach.

There has been an explosion of interest and activity over the past decade on democratic citizenship and citizenship education. Of interest to this study was, in particular, the International Association for the Evaluation of Educational Achievement (IEA) study that involved more than 20 countries from North America, Europe, Asia, Australia and Latin America (Torney-Purta et al., 1999). Specifically, the project Argonauts of Europe, that ran from 2002-2005, aimed at helping student teachers understand how cultural beliefs are manifested in social practices, and how they may be perceived, constructed and negotiated in schools. The manner in which students were assisted to develop an understanding of intercultural education as preparation to teach effectively about the world in which their students would become citizens at local, national and international levels provided invaluable insights for the approach adopted in the study.

The project’s principle focus was on combining theoretical work, self-reflections and full immersion in a different culture. It had to help student teachers reach a heightened sense of awareness of the underlying values associated with particular beliefs they held about teaching (and

94 learning) especially when dealing with diversity. It involved undergraduate student teachers from eight different European countries and was carried out in two months. Teacher trainees were placed in primary schools outside their own countries to build multicultural working groups of approximately ten student teachers in each country. This was to ensure that each group shared life experiences with people from different countries and cultures. The case studies were comparatively analysed by the teachers within an intercultural environment combined with in-class observation and reflexive journals. All of this was carried out within a framework of personal experience abroad.

Student teachers were encouraged to consider their own perspectives and conceptualisations of what and who they were teaching within an international and empirical context. They were also shown how to explore the ways in which these processes operated and could be related to wider social and institutional relationships as a means of exploring what citizenship meant to them. This personal and professional exploration had to make them more critically aware of their general and taken-for-granted beliefs, increase their intercultural competence and show them ways to transmit this to their students so that they would understand the values associated with European and global citizenship. In this project, intercultural competence was understood as an ability to deal constructively with questions arising from cultural diversity. Student teachers were not only expected to deal constructively with diversity but also to identify and employ approaches to teaching issues which had to do with diversity in society as a whole and which promoted the values of European and global citizenship.

From the results, it became clear that how global citizenship is defined and implemented within a school curriculum varies and does not usually make any reference to the problematic nature of the concepts of citizenship or globalization. As a response to this oversight, Abt-Perkins and Gomez (1993) have suggested that teaching about cultural values must begin with self-inquiry. Teachers must first examine their fundamental values, attitudes and belief systems and how they inform their teaching in order to fully understand the impact of their role in their students’ socialization. Styles and attitudes are rooted in experience and are developed through interactions within this experience and can thus be modified only by the individual. Kincheloe (1993) too suggests that teachers should learn to practice what he refers to as post-formal thinking, which implies becoming involved in the production of their own knowledge before they help the learners to construct theirs. Through post-formal thinking they will be able to help the students reinterpret their own lives and uncover new talents as a result of their encounter with schooling. This will promote the process of meta-analysis,that is thinking about thinking and exploring the inner world of psychological experience (ibid., p. 26).

It is from the above process that teaching can lead to what William Schubert (1986) refers to as currere, that is a way of emphasizing the individual’s own capacity to conceptualize his or her

95 autobiography. In this manner, the individual is able to seek meaning amid the swirl of present events, and also move historically into his or her own past to recover and reconstitute origins, and images and create possible directions of his or her own future. As he writes:

Based on the sharing of autobiographical accounts with others who strive for similar understanding, the curriculum becomes a reconceiving of one’s perspective on life. It also becomes a social process whereby individuals come to greater understanding of themselves, others, and the world through mutual reconceptualization. The curriculum is the interpretation of lived experience (ibid., 33).

Drawing from the above assertion, Pinar (1994) suggests four steps that would make teaching an inward journey for both teachers and learners. The first step is the regressive stage, that calls for an ability to return to the past and understand how it affects the present. Because the past impinges on the present, for teaching to be effective teachers must know how the past has positioned the learners’ present activities. The second stage is the progressive stage, and it requires an ability to imagine a future, envision possibilities and discern where meditative images might lead. As people think of how the past has affected the present, they should also be able to picture how what they do will be realized in the future. What they do at the present should be that which would have a positive effect in future. Then there is a need for an ability to understand the present in its own right without the past or the future. Failure to do so will make it difficult to relate to either the past or the future. It is only after this third stage, termed the analytical stage that there is a possibility for synthesis, that is, to put the three together. The last stage involves drawing from the past to inform the present and hence get to understand the future. It is this process that will enable both teachers and learners to breakdown all the master narratives that had been constructed for them. The process will enable them to acknowledge their dispositions and draw on them to build for the future. It is in this sense that the study intended to find out how teachers dealt with historical dispositions of the learners and prompted them (learners) to reflect and identify ways in which the unifying elements within these dispositions could be invested in when promoting a sense of Kenyan national culture. Of particular interest were the ways in which teachers engaged with the representations and assisted learners to understand the origins of each others’ cultural practices and how they related to their own.

7.2 RESEARCH DESIGN

To study how Kenyan History teachers embraced the notion of currere as a teaching strategy I adopted what Merriam (2002) refers to as a basic interpretive qualitative research design. As she argues, this kind of approach enables us to understand and explain the meaning of social phenomena with as little disruption of the natural setting as possible. Its key philosophical

96 assumption is that reality is constructed by individuals interacting within their social worlds. According to Merriam (1998, 2002), this approach implies a direct concern with experience as it is lived, felt or undergone. It is assumed that meaning is embedded in people’s experiences and is mediated through perceptions. Therefore, the strategies that the teachers used to nurture a Kenyan national culture through history teaching were to reflect, first, how they attempted to reconcile their individual autobiographical texts to those of the students they taught. Second, the way they were able to draw on these texts to develop an understanding of individual and collective biographies was of particular interest to the study. The strategies they employed to affirm and encourage a questioning stance towards their own and learners’ cultural expressions to highlight common features among them rendered important the classroom interactions, verbal and non-verbal that occurred during lessons. They were considered components of a social reality I had to understand as semiotic frameworks through which meaning was constructed. They had to be studied to understand how they were shaped by experiences within Kenya and drawn on to shape what was to be learnt as historical knowledge within lessons. The assumption here was that how teachers made meaning of their and learners’ social worlds mirrored their own understanding of these worlds. These were resources, according to (Geertz, 1973), from which I had to make meaning of what was said and happened in the lessons. Therefore, in finding ways to unravel the teachers’ construction of a Kenyan identity, the study focused on how their meaning-making was represented in their use of language and classroom interaction.

According to Philips and Hardy (2002), language discourses are embodied and enacted in a variety of texts, although they exist beyond the individual texts that compose them. Texts can thus be considered as discursive units and material manifestation of discourses. They may take a variety of forms, including written texts, spoken words, pictures, symbols, and other artefacts. However, they are not meaningful individually but only through their interconnection with other texts, the different discourses on which they draw, and the nature of their production, dissemination, and consumption. Therefore, discursive activity does not occur in a vacuum, that is, discourses do not possess meaning on their own, but rather are shared and social, emanating out of interactions between social groups and the complex societal structures in which they are embedded. Accordingly, if we are to understand them and their effects, we must also understand the context in which they arise. As also put by Fairclough and Wodak (1997, p.277):

Discourse is not produced without context and cannot be understood without taking context into consideration… Discourses are always connected to other discourses, which were produced earlier, as well as those, which are produced synchronically and subsequently.

Capturing and understanding the teachers’ strategies as discourses thus required their understanding as texts that indicated the meanings they attached to social worlds, and these

97 strategies were the unit of analysis in the study. They were considered as societal formations that had to be understood as products of discursive processes that teachers had constantly to reflect upon and change in response to other discourses that were manifested during lessons. As a result, what teachers and learners did and said during lessons was understood as partly informed by the structures within which they were teaching and learning. As texts brought into lessons, they did not exist as an objective totality but were at all times structured, be it partly or temporarily. I thus took it for granted that this structuring would have instances when possibilities would be marginalized or excluded. However, the latter would be imaginary because, in reality, the notion of Kenya as a country, implied in the words of Laclau (1990, p.61) “a space of representation, ... whose terms are external to what is representable in the objective spatially constituted by the given structure”. This was a representation that made what was imagined to be national politics possible and provided a platform on which Kenyans could discuss with one another. It provided what was meaningful to discuss and the manner in which it could be discussed, thus making local, regional and global issues important to reflect on from a national perspective. As Held et al. (2000) also argued, it was a national culture that had to be understood as embedded within more expansive sets of inter- relations in the course of which people blended and produced the taken for granted Kenyan culture. It is in this sense that the national perspective was characterized by the abovementioned despatialization, and Kenyan national identity could not be confined to an ideal type of the local, given the influx of meanings that people produced through the continuous interconnectedness and development of cultures within the country.

From the perspective of discourse analysis, identity is an ongoing process accomplished through social interaction, particularly language and communication (Burman & Parker, 1993; du Gay, 1996; Philips & Hardy, 2002). Although people or objects do have a physical or material existence, the social meaning of this existence is discursively generated rather than inherent and internal to the person or object itself. As a result, the relevance of social identities to social action can only be determined within the context in which their accomplishment had to happen or happened (West & Fensternmaker 1995). It is in this sense that social identity acts as an interpretive frame for social action and an indicator of what people think about a particular issue or group of people. In doing so, it functions as a mechanism through which collective group interests are played out in the social practices of individuals. Thus, in the study, both teachers and learners are viewed as language users who engage in text construction and talk not just as individuals but also as members of multiple social categories. They construct or accomplish and display social identities in discourse. However, such constructions are not taken to be fixed or stable as they are the outcome of a complex and contradictory interplay of discourses.

Van Dijk’s (1997) view is that critical discourse analysis may benefit from multi-method and multi-dimensional approaches because they have the potential to contribute to “our insight into the

98 role of discourse in society and the reproduction of inequality” (ibid., 24). Since social identity is considered to occur through the complex interaction and convergence of various discursive moves, resources and strategies, it was viewed here as fragmented, ambiguous and subject to continuous reproduction through political, social and discourse processes (Hardy et al., 1999; Van Dijk 1997; Wodak 1996).

In addition, the reproduction and sustenance of power relations between different social groups is constructed through discursive strategies of group definition and differentiation that can only be understood through a range of discourse analytical methods. As Wodak (1996, p.126) explains:

Discourse about others is always constructed with one’s own identity, that is to say, with the question ‘how do we see ourselves?’ The construction of identity is a process of differentiation - a description of one’s own group and simultaneously a separation from the others.

Therefore, in this study, there was a need to select a research site that provided naturally occurring texts and talk as data. The particular research questions that needed to be answered and the theoretical assumptions of the study imposed certain requirements on the selection of the site, which had to offer the potential for the discursive struggle over identity to be clearly focused on (cf. Philips and Hardy, 2002). However, practical considerations played a role because it also had to allow ready access to textual data within the timeframes and resource constraints of a doctoral study. As Flick (1998) argues, convenience as an aspect of purposive sampling refers to the selection of those cases which are the easiest to access under given conditions. This may simply reduce the effort but from time to time it may be the only way to conduct research with limited resources of time and personnel. For all these reasons, and consistent with guidance provided in research theory writings referred to here, the sites finally chosen were an extended instance of social interaction.

The recursive data-gathering process proved useful in ensuring a rich quality of data. A preliminary analysis of the data collected in the pilot study helped me critically look at the research tools used to encourage teachers to explain their reasons for translating the objectives of the syllabus into the teaching and learning materials, strategies and activities they used during lessons. Data obtained from this exploration provided insights into how to adapt them (research tools) to improve the quality of data that was to be collected in the main study. In the initial stages there was thus no clear distinction between data gathering and analysis. While the earlier stages of data collection tended to be generative, the later ones brought closure by seeking and deepening insights. Therefore, the approaches of data collection and analysis helped to subject any bias that could have arisen to scrutiny. This was from, firstly, the observations of lessons, and, secondly, from interview discussions where probes and prompts provided more and better insights into what

I thought of what was observed, how teachers interpreted their actions in the interactions that occurred during lessons, and the various conceptual models referred to in the study. In this regard I also drew comfort from Gitlin and Russell’s (1990, p.187) view that “for research to be authentic, the relationship between what is said and the person(s) doing the talking must be made apparent.” Following this advice in the writing process I make every attempt to clarify when giving my interpretation of teachers’ practice, and when it is their own voice that is reported.

7.3 THE RESEARCH PROCESS

The research process was carried out in two stages.

7.3.1 Stage One a) The pilot study

According to Teijlingen and Hundley (2001), the term ‘pilot study’ can refer to a feasibility study, which is a small-scale version, or trial carried out in preparation for the major study. However, a pilot study can also be used, as it was in this case, to develop and test the adequacy of the research instruments. In this case it was conducted to establish the appropriateness of the instruments for capturing classroom interactions and the teachers’ reasons for deciding on them. It enabled me to design a research protocol and assess whether it was realistic and workable to study interactions I expected to be oriented towards the fulfilment of the requirements of the History and Government syllabus. I viewed these interactions as reflecting an understanding of the concepts and principles that were promoted by this syllabus. Thus, the instruments I designed had to facilitate the collection of data that would reveal how teachers were able or not to create a context in which the different ethnic views, and what they considered as cultural symbols, were used as resources for clarifying what is crucial for constructing meaningfully and effectively an efficacious sense of Kenyan national identity.

The pilot study was carried out between September and November 2005, in two provincial government schools, one a boys’ school the other a girls’ school, both situated in Nairobi Province.

b) Sampling process

According to Strauss and Corbin (1998), and Auerbach and Silverstein (2003), in-depth data illuminates patterns, concepts, categories, properties and dimensions of the given phenomena. It is important to get an appropriate sample size, as this can help generate sufficient data, which in their view is determined by theoretical saturation. The latter occurs when no new or relevant data seems

100 to emerge for a category, or when the category is well developed in terms of its properties and dimensions, demonstrating that variations and the relationships between categories are well established and validated. The researcher’s knowledge of the given area may provide insight that allows for selection of samples that are more efficient. This knowledge can come from two sources, i.e., a literature review or personal experience. However, prior experience and knowledge may also be a hindrance to the researcher, if its influence causes him or her to miss or put aside valuable insights in selecting participants. Therefore, preconceived notions that a researcher has must act only as a guide, and this made me choose Nairobi province for the study.

Nairobi province is one of the eight provinces in Kenya and shares common boundaries with Nairobi city, the capital of Kenya, albeit it functions as a state unit. It is the smallest province in area and is entirely urban. It has only one local authority that is Nairobi city and only one district, Nairobi district. The district has eight divisions, which are further divided into 50 locations, mostly named after residential estates. Even though Nairobi is the capital city of the country, it is considered also as a district because of the size of its population.

Due to its unique status, all the government schools in this province are at provincial level. This is an important factor as it provided access to a wide variety of schools. Secondly, it was less costly to carry out the study in the province as most schools were within reach. Lastly, given the timeframe of doctoral studies, I needed an area where I could easily access a variety of the schools and save on travelling expenses and time.

Government schools in Kenya are divided into national, provincial and district schools. They are all public schools and fee paying. Even though this is the case, the government pays part of the tuition fees for every student. This applies to both the primary and secondary schools. Teachers in all these schools are employed by the government. The national schools are identified as such because they are the top performing and selective in their admission policies. Only the best candidates, those with average scores of 75% and above, are admitted to these schools. Provincial schools cater primarily for students residing in the provinces and are compelled by law to have an enrolment of at least 75% from within the provinces. District schools are smaller and meant for mainly students within the district. They are the least expensive in terms of fees.

The sample selection was non-random, purposeful and small. I had to test, discover and understand what type of design best suited the focus of the study and had to select a sample from which the most could be learned. Patton (2001) argues that the logic and power of purposeful sampling lies in selecting information-rich cases for studying in depth, namely those from whom one can learn a great deal about issues relevant to the purpose of the research, hence the term ‘purposeful sampling’.

101

Lofland and Lofland (1984) believe that researchers are more likely to gain successful access to situations if they make use of contacts that can help remove barriers to entrance. I was guided by this view when having to decide which schools would be more willing to participate in the study. I knew the principal of the girls’ school and approached her. She was happy to introduce me to the History teacher, who was willing to be involved in the study. She also introduced me to the principal of the boys’ school. Later on she had to take me personally to the school, after several attempts to meet with the principal had failed. He cooperated and introduced me to the History teacher.

In particular, the teachers were keen to know about my background and what I expected from them. They wished to know how the data and information I gathered from them would be used. I assured them that it would be treated with confidence and only used for the purposes of deciding on the appropriateness of the research methods. After the discussion, both teachers were willing to work with me and were excited to be a part of the study.

c) Sampling of schools

The selected schools were diverse in terms of cultural representations and had a broad cross- section of learners in terms of ethnicity, socio-economic status, family and religious background. A letter explaining the purpose of the study was given to the principals (see Appendix 1). I also personally answered questions that the principals posed in relation to the purpose of the study and the research process.

The first (school A) was a girls’ school, established in 1953 by the Loreto Sisters to promote girl- child education in Kenya. Situated in Starehe Division, it was a three-streamed school with 12 classes, each stream having between 40 and 45 students. The school had about 480 students and 30 teachers. It was also well resourced, with three science laboratories for the three science subjects, a computer room, Home Science building, and a sports ground, amongst other facilities. In the Kenyan school administration system a division represents unit with a district. In essence these are political administrative units with a head and serving bureaucrats.

The second (school B) was a boys’ school located in Nairobi Province, Makadara division. It was established in 1932 as an Indian school. After independence it was converted into a government public school. It was a six-streamed school, with 24 classes. Each stream had between 45 and 52 students. There were over 1,000 students and 87 teachers. The facilities included a library, a computer room and 6 science laboratories, allocated equally to Physics, Chemistry and Biology. The other buildings were used by the various entities of the Department of Humanities; namely, History, Geography and Religious Education. The school also had a large sports ground where students could play football, hockey and rugby.

102

Table 7.8: Profile of schools

Type Est. Location Classes Streams Students No of Teachers Resources per students stream Provincial 1953 Nairobi 12 3 40 480 30 Library, Girls’ Day Province Computer Lab, school 2 Science Labs, (Starehe Home Science Division) Room, Sports Ground Provincial 1932 Nairobi 24 6 45 1080 87 Library, Boys’ Day Province Computer lab, (Makadara 6 science labs, Division) Sports Ground

d) Sampling of teachers

I worked with two teachers, one per school. Each was given a letter of introduction that detailed the purpose of my pilot study. The letter indicated that they were to participate voluntarily and were allowed to withdraw at any time they felt the need to do so. Anything that was observed during this period would be used for the study and would not be discussed with their principals (see Appendix 2). I also personally answered questions the teachers posed in relation to the purpose of the study and the research process.

The first one, (Teacher 1), a female teacher of 53 years of age had attained her Diploma in Education in 1978, from Kenyatta University, which is located 16 kilometres from Nairobi. She studied History and Geography and had been teaching since 1978 in various schools in Kenya. She was a Head of Department in the girls’ school and taught History and Geography from form 1-4. She was also a class teacher in addition to being in charge of the environment projects in the school.

The second teacher (Teacher 2) from the boys’ school is also a female, 33 years old. She obtained her Bachelor of Education Arts degree from Kenyatta University in 1998. She had been teaching since 1998 and had so far taught in two schools. At the time the study was conducted she was teaching History and Christian Religious Education (CRE) in forms 1 to 4. She was also a class teacher and a member of both the Disciplinary Committee and Guidance and Counselling. Table 7.2 (below) provides a summarized profile of the teachers.

103

Table 7.9: Profile of teachers

Teacher Gender Age Qualifications Where Teaching Responsibilities obtained Experience 1 Female 53 Diploma in Kenyatta From 1978 – Head of Department. Education University 2005. Has Teaches History and College – taught for 29 Geography forms 1-4 1978 years in Class teacher. various Teacher in charge of schools environment. 2 Female 33 Bachelor of Kenyatta From 1998 – Teaches History and Education (Arts) University 2005. Has Christian Religious – 1998 taught for 7 Education Forms 1-4.

years. Guidance and Counselling. Disciplinary Committee. British council facilitator on civic education.

e) Research tools

Classroom observations

According to Bell (1993), direct observation can be particularly useful in discovering whether people do what they say they do, or behave in the way they claim. It is important to experience firsthand what people do when engaged with their practices. Patton (2002) also argues that through direct observations the researcher is in a better position to understand and capture the context within which people interact. An appreciation of the context is very important when the researcher is interpreting data as he or she does not have to rely on prior conceptualisation of what might be happening on the site. S/he can get to experience activity for what it is in the context of the people observed. It provides the researcher with the opportunity to see activities and interaction that may be taken for granted by the people being observed. These activities cannot be captured by methods other than observations. However, since the classroom as a social system involves routine, teachers may not be aware of these routines as they take them for granted. As an observer a researcher can pick up on these nuances and provide a clear picture of the practice observed (Patton 2002). I understood that I had assumptions about what I was studying because of my experience of history teaching classes in Kenya, including my own. The impressions I had, even though subliminal, gave me a significant base from which I could interpret and analyse any particular datum. I recognized that these experiences alerted me to subtleties which would be unimportant to someone non- Kenyan. I therefore, had to consciously force myself to raise continually questions that would be unexpected in the Kenyan context.

Firsthand experience with the schools and the teachers allowed me to be discovery oriented. Through direct personal contact with and observations of classroom settings I was able to capture

104 the context within which teachers interacted. By being on site I had the opportunity to see things that may have routinely escaped recording on paper among the teachers. Access to teacher-learner interactions, and not only written documents or verbal reports, exposed me to important nuances that are apparent only to an observer who has not become fully immersed in those routines. As Patton (2000) explained, since all social systems involve routines, participants in those routines may take them so much for granted that they cease to be aware of them. To guard against this the purposes of observational data are to describe the setting, the activities that take place in the setting, the people participating in the activities and the meanings of what is observed from the perspective of those being observed. As a result, educational researchers use three forms of observation, namely streams of behaviour chronicles, analysis of proxemics and kinesics and interaction analysis. The stream of behaviour chronicle is an account of what a participant does and says. Researchers sample across participants, events and settings to collect chronicles pertinent to their themes and questions. These methods help them to delineate categories of activities, study the use of time and motion and map movement and the physical environment. They also help to generate process data for investigations of how materials are manipulated or what styles teachers use. Proxemics and kinesics, on the other hand, are concerned with social uses of space and with bodily movement. Proxemics is the study of how people use space, while kinesics is the study of how people move.

These forms of observation helped me study the use of classroom space and patterns of student- student or teacher-student interactions. The classroom observations also provided insights that teachers were asked to talk about in an interview. Drawing from these views, to collect data, an observation schedule that covered the following categories was used:

 Classroom interaction: This included not only how history teachers interacted with the learners, but also how the learners interacted with each other in terms of classroom debates. As argued by Meyer (1987) and Bernstein (1975), the way teachers interact with the students in terms of movement, speech, space and control translate to power and control in the classroom. For this study, it was important to find out how classroom interactions during history lessons encouraged or not an understanding and appreciation and interconnectedness of cultural situations and points of view amongst the ethnic groups of Kenya. Learners and teachers were expected to discuss, critically reflect upon and share views on the lesson content and across what they viewed as their cultural differences if they were to understand what it meant to be Kenyan.

 The teaching methods that the history teachers used formed an important part of the lessons. As argued by Bernstein (1975) and Meyer (1987), the manner in which a teacher conducts his/her lesson has an effect on the learners’ participation. In the views of these authors, pedagogic communication determines the degree of participation or lack of it

105

during lessons. Specifically, in Bernstein’s view, the integration in practice of particular curriculum content and design, classroom strategies and techniques, purpose and methods, all come together in the realities of what happens in the classroom. Together they reflect a view of how a teacher’s work within an institutional context specifies a particular version of what knowledge is most worth, what it means to know something, and who is responsible to construct meaning and how this role, in turn, construct representations of the teacher and others.

 How the teachers used the artefacts, such as the lesson plans, schemes of work and class texts, reflected what they considered important to translate the History curriculum objectives in ways that opened up what different communities prioritized in institutionalising what they valued. As argued by Giroux (2000), it is assumed that it is only when teachers transcend the artefacts and clarify to the pupils the embedded values that they are able to teach meaningfully. Both teachers and learners used the texts to enable an appreciation of the multiple perspectives that jointly defined what being Kenyan was about.

 Physical aspects, such as the organization of the classroom setting and personal space, were to be noted as pointers of what was structurally important to each school and classroom practice. Bernstein (1975, 1996) points out that the context in which knowledge is transmitted and received helps one understand how power and control work within a pedagogical relationship. In what he refers to as a “strong framing”, the teachers’ and learners’ spaces are well defined and controlled. As Bernstein (1975, p.88) explains, ‘framing’ refers to the degree of control that teachers and pupils possess over the selection, sequencing, pacing and evaluation of the knowledge transmitted and received in a pedagogical relationship. In short, framing has to do with the way in which the relationship between the teacher and the learner is set up and, ‘strong framing’ refers to a limited degree of options for students whilst ‘weak framing’ refers to the apparent control by learners. It is framing (control) which contains within it the making and unmaking of the classification (power). This implied that how teachers engaged the learners on issues relating to cultural differences indicated the framing they considered crucial for teaching them to question and develop an ability to critique the content to which they are exposed in the lessons (see Appendix 3).

106

Interviews

According to Le Compte and Preissle (1993), acculturation, socialization and schooling are abstract constructs most readily operationalized in natural, ongoing behavioural transactions. They are most directly accessible through observation. However, they argue, as researchers become increasingly concerned with the enhancement of construct validity, the way abstractions are meaningful and shared across times, settings and populations requires supporting constructs obtained through multiple data collection strategies. This will increase the reliability of the data through the process of gathering and corroboration (see also Yin, 1994). To use Brewer and Hunter’s (1989) words, these are tools that allow an inquiry of an “arsenal of methods that have non-overlapping weaknesses in addition to their complementary strengths” (p.17). It is in light of these views that interviews were also used.

For Patton (2001), the purpose of interviewing is to allow the researcher to enter the participants’ perspective. Qualitative interviews begin with the assumption that the perspective of others is meaningful, knowable and possible to make explicit. In this case, classroom observations were mainly interactions without teachers’ explanations of what they were doing, and open–ended interviews made it possible for me not to presuppose which dimension of feeling or thought would be salient for the teachers. They were allowed to select from among a full repertoire of possible responses they considered most salient. As Patton advices, as a researcher I deliberately tried not to determine dimensions, themes, and images or words teachers used to describe their feelings, thoughts, and experiences. I also ensured that questions asked were neither personal nor sensitive to the teachers (see Appendix 4).

The study included the use of an audio tape recorder, which not only increased the accuracy of data collection, but also enabled me to pay more attention to the interviewees. When it was not possible to use a tape recorder, taking strategic and focused notes rather than attempting verbatim notes was carried out. The notes facilitated the transcription of the data later, in particular locating important quotations from the tape itself. In this preliminary study, notes helped in formulating new questions as the interview moved along, especially where it was necessary to clarify something said earlier. Looking over field notes during the interviews ensured that the inquiry unfolded in the hoped-for- direction.

f) Research Process

Classroom observations

My initial intention was to videotape classroom observations but this was not possible. In school A, even though the principal was not opposed to the idea, the history teacher had a problem with it

107 and in School B the principal made it clear that he did not approve of any video recording. This was one of the conditions I had to abide by if I was to carry out the pilot study in the school. The teachers did not have a problem with audio recordings. Instead of video recording I used a tape recorder in all my classroom observations to record what was said in lessons. Interactions and other forms of behaviour were captured by making shorthand extensive field-notes in a log book.

I gathered data on Form One History lessons that dealt with the following topics:

 The peoples of Kenya up to the 19th Century

 Social, Economic and Political organization of Kenyan societies in the 19th Century

Three lessons were observed in each school because History and all other humanity subjects were taught three times a week. Each lesson was 40 minutes long. In the girls’ school, the observations were conducted on the 19th, 20th and 21st of September 2005. (See Appendix 5 for records).

Interviews

The interviews were used to provide teachers with an opportunity to re-represent their teaching through reflection and clarify how their taken-for-granted conceptions impacted on their understanding of Kenyan national identity. Both teachers were interviewed on the last day of the classroom observations. The teacher from the Girls’ school was interviewed on the 21st of September 2005. The interview took 45 minutes, from 3:00 to 3:45 pm, and was carried out in the school’s tearoom, where, as the teacher put it, “we could talk without any interference”. The teacher from the Boys’ school was interviewed on the 30th of September 2005, between 2:50 and 3:30 pm. The interview took place in the History classroom. On both occasions a tape recorder was used.

There was a need to engage with the teachers and understand why they used the strategies and discussions I had witnessed during the lessons, and corroborate or not the meanings I had attached to them. As Button (1991) warns, I was aware that there might be differences between my explanations of what I witnessed and those the teachers might provide. I had to guard against the discrepancy being resolved in my favour, therefore, in dealing with the possibility of gaps in interpretation that Button warned against, the views of the teachers on their own actions were given recognition and interrogated in relation to mine. During our discussions, I played the tape for the teachers, to trigger their memories, and when complete I invited them to talk about their lessons without any interruption on my part. (See Appendix 6 for the interviews).

Reflections on the pilot study

With the observation schedule I was able to give attention to what the literature had identified as crucial concepts and activities that need to be in place in situations where cultural mediation has to occur in order to build a national identity. It focussed me on understandings of culture, the

108 interactions that occurred in the lessons and how they positioned the teachers and learners. The latter was particularly important to an understanding of how discussions were conducted, that is, in whose control they were.

The general and broadly content-repeating responses I received from the teachers during the interviews indicated that to gain a deeper understanding of how teachers thought about their teaching I needed to have a dialogue with them. There was need for another method or tools through which the responses could be probed and teachers prompted, to clarify in greater detail and specificity what they said. From these responses, I also realized that I needed to encourage them to think deeper about the nature of the teaching strategies and discussions they promoted during the lessons. I had to talk to them as someone interested in their explanations of the concepts and principles they took for granted as clear to all, to establish what they thought was necessary in teaching History to nurture a Kenyan identity. I thus could not avoid introducing a developmental aspect into the main study.

According to Gitlin (1994), developmental research causes a shift from the traditional one-way process, where the research is ‘done to’ participants and they are not part of the process, except for providing information. In the case of this study, since teachers seemed to take for granted the concepts and principles that underpinned the strategies and discussions they used during the lessons, in the main study they needed to be prompted through dialogue to reflect on them. Their explanations had to be interrupted. As Gitlin would argue, dialogue does not attempt to sway people to adopt another’s way of thinking but rather to build an understanding on working together. He contends that a precondition for dialogue is that all participants see the discourse as important and have a say indicating its course. This should be the case even when one participant in the dialogue understands more than the other. No one should be judged as unaffected. In addition, because the pilot study was conducted only in day schools, I not only needed the variety that the schools offered, but I also had to use schools that were fully representative of the province’s schools profile. The province has both day and boarding school type.

Also as Strauss and Corbin (1998) and Auerbach and Silverstein (2003) argue, the key to generating sufficient in-depth data that can illuminate patterns, concepts, categories, properties and dimensions of the given phenomena, depends on an appropriate sample size that is determined by theoretical saturation. Such saturation is possible when no new or relevant data seems to emerge regarding a category, or when the category is well developed in terms of its properties and dimensions, demonstrating variations and that relationships among categories are well established and validated. As indicated below, I aimed to achieve this through the main study.

109

7.3.2 Stage Two a) The main study

The main study was also carried out in Nairobi province in Kenya because it has a diverse population that represents all the various ethnic groups that live in Kenya. This makes it different from the other provinces that have regions that are mainly ethnically dominated. Also during the pilot study it became clear that Nairobi province provided the diverse group of teachers and learners that I needed for my study. It also has different categories of schools both private and public. There are about 100 private schools that offer the Kenyan curriculum, while others are based on foreign education systems, such as the American and British, amongst others. There were 47 public or government schools in total, and these were also of different categories. The province had four boys’ boarding schools, six girls’ boarding schools, 21 boys’ day schools, 12 girls’ day schools and four mixed day schools. Most of the schools were well resourced in terms of the basic facilities, such as science laboratories, classrooms, music rooms, computer rooms, metal and art work rooms, and home science rooms, depending on the subjects they offered. They also had various sports facilities, ranging from football fields to swimming pools. Boarding schools were also equipped with good dormitories, sickbays and dining halls. b) Sampling

I needed to select teachers who would be able to provide deeper insights into the research question. They had to be more familiar with the syllabus for History and Government in order to provide higher quality data. As Morse (2000, p.4) puts it: “There is an inverse relationship between the amount of usable data obtained from each participant and the number of participants”. In other words, if I selected teachers from whom I would be able to gather a considerable usable data, it would be appropriate to involve few. Considering the constraining nature of PhD studies, the guidance influenced me towards a sample size aimed at theoretical saturation (see also Goulding, 2002; Locke, 2001). c) Schools

To gain entry into any school in Kenya, as I discovered during my pilot study, is not easy. The situation worsens if one gets a letter from the ministry, as most head teachers read this as being undermined by the researcher, which discourages lack of cooperation. In Kenya, the principals are considered to be representatives of the Ministry of Education, from which it was thus not necessary to seek permission directly. It is advisable to go through the principals themselves, but most can only be accessed through their colleagues. However, on one hand, Flick (1998) argues that entry through a familiar person might raise ethical questions, with the researcher’s request, questions, methods and time having to undergo official examination because of the effects they might have on the particular institution. On the other hand, Wolcott (1988) and Fetterman (1989) argue that it is

110 important for the researcher to be sensitive to the culture of the research participants. Drawing on the latter, I had to rely on acquaintances and respect the culture or ways of doing things in the Kenyan schools, otherwise I would have risked distrust from the principals.

The principals recorded my involvement in their schools in a visitors’ book, which is an official text kept in all schools as a record, and often used to track activities within them. In brief meetings with them I explained my intentions and submitted a letter with the same information for official purposes (cf. Appendix 1). The principals in turn arranged for me to meet with the Heads of Department, who introduced me to the form 1 History teachers.

I then explained the purpose of the research to them and discussed the research tools that were to be used for recording, to ensure that their decision to take part in the study was an informed one. It was also made clear to them that they were under no obligation to participate in the study and that it was within their rights to refuse to participate. After the discussion, each teacher was given a copy of the letter indicating everything that had been discussed for his or her own record.

Having taught in one of the boarding schools in Nairobi, I approached 2 boys’ (PBBW in Westlands and PBBD in Dagoretti) and two girls’ (PGBS1 and PGBS2 in Starehe) boarding schools and invited them to participate in the study. Two boys’ day schools in, respectively, Pumwani (PBDP) and Starehe (PBDS) divisions, and two girls’ day schools, PGDW1 and PGDW2 in Westlands were also invited.

The boys’ boarding school in the Westlands division is in an area with middle and high-income estates. The students were from either middle class or high-income families. The school was well resourced and had a student population of 1080. It is referred to in the study as PBBW. It had five streams with 20 classes of 54 students each. The other, referred to as PBBD in Dagoretti had 1248 students, 24 classes and six streams, each stream having 52 students. The girls’ boarding schools were in Starehe and were also well resourced. One of them referred to here as PGBS1 had 1344 students and six streams whilst the other, PGBS2 had 864 students had four streams. Respectively, they had 56 and 54 students per class.

The girls’ day schools PGDW1 and PGDW2 were also located in the Westlands division, They both had 360 students, two streams and 45 students in each one. The one boys’ day school situated in Pumwani division , PBDP, had 504 students, three streams with about 42 students in each and, the other school in Starehe division, PBDS, had 736 students, four streams each and 46 students in each. The terms of my invitation were accepted in all the schools except for one boys’ day school, PBDS, in the Starehe division. Teachers were not willing to be observed and preferred to only discuss the syllabus with me. The condition disqualified them for participation in the study. As a result, seven schools participated in the study. The table below shows their profiles.

111

Table 7.10 Profile of schools in the main study Classes Streams per s Stud numbers s numbers teacher

Name Type Location tudent Resources ent tream

PBBW Provincial Westlands 20 5 54 1080 86 Labs, computer and art boys division rooms metal and woodwork boarding rooms, dormitories, staff houses, library, chapel, sports grounds PBBD Provincial Dagoretti 24 6 52 1248 78 Library, labs, computer and boys division art rooms metal and boarding woodwork rooms, dormitories, staff houses, chapel, sports grounds PGBS Provincial Starehe 24 6 56 1344 92 Labs, library, computer & 1 girls’ art rooms, music &home division boarding science rooms, dormitories, staff houses, chapel, sports grounds PGBS Provincial Starehe 16 4 54 864 56 Labs, music and home 2 girls’ division science rooms, dormitories, boarding sports grounds, library PGD Provincial Westlands 8 2 45 360 28 Labs, music and home W1 girls’ day division science rooms, computer rooms, sports grounds, chapel, library, swimming pool PGD Provincial Westlands 8 2 45 360 32 Labs, music and home W2 girls’ day division science rooms, computer rooms, sports grounds, chapel, library, swimming pool PBDP Provincial Pumwani 12 3 42 504 30 Library, lab, art room, boys’ day division sports ground

d) Teachers

The teachers who voluntarily offered to participate in the study were given a letter asking for parental consent and the assent of the students (see Appendix 2). For the study to be approved by the ethics committee it was important to seek the consent of the students and parents even though they were not directly involved. The fact that they participated in the lessons I had to observe was sufficient to warrant such permission. However, the letters were not equally distributed in schools. The schools with fewer streams, two and three streams, had only two History teachers for the

112 whole school. In such a case, I only worked with the one teaching the Form One classes. In the schools with more than four streams, there were three of four History teachers. In these schools I also only worked with the Form One History teachers. Hence, from the 7 schools there were 19 History teachers and 9 of these taught Form One history. None of the teachers had participated in the pilot study. Table 7.4 (below) summarizes these figures.

Table 7.11: Number of teachers in the study

SCHOOLS No. of History teachers No. of lessons/teachers in the study PBBW 4 1 PBBD 3 2 PGBS1 3 1 PGBS2 5 1 PGDW1 1 1 PGDW2 1 1 PBDP 2 2 Total 19 9

Of the 9 teachers, one had a degree from Moi University, four from Kenyatta with one holding a first degree from Nairobi, two from Nairobi, two from Egerton and one from Siriba Teacher’s College (now Maseno University). The teachers had teaching experience ranging from 12 to 26 years. They also had various responsibilities, which included being head of department, class teacher and, for those teaching in boarding schools, some were also house teachers. Table 7.5 (below) gives a summary of the teachers’ profiles:

Table 7.12: Profile of teachers in main study

Teacher Qualifications Where Teaching Responsibilities obtained Experience

1 Bachelor of Moi Has taught for 13 History teacher form 1-4, Education (Arts) University years class teacher 1993 2 Bachelor of Kenyatta Has taught for 16 History teacher 1-4, class Education (Arts) University years teacher, HOD humanities. 1990

113

Bachelor of Egerton Has taught for 14 Class teacher, history and Education (Arts.) University years CRE 1-4 3 1992 4 Bachelor of Kenyatta Has taught for 12 House teacher, class Education Arts University years teacher, HOD 1994 5 Bachelor of Egerton Has taught for 12 Class teacher , history and Education Arts University years CRE 1-4 1994 6 Bachelor of Kenyatta Has taught for 12 Class teacher, history and Education Arts University years CRE 1-4, house assistant, 1994 patron law club 7 Bachelor of Nairobi Has taught for 26 HOD guidance and Education Arts university years counselling, class teacher, 1980 history and CRE 1-4. Masters of Kenyatta Education university 2005 8 Diploma in Siriba Has taught for 16 History and English 1-4, Education Teachers years class teacher College 1990 9 Bachelor of Nairobi Has taught for 25 History and CRE teacher 1- Education Arts university years 4, class teacher, guidance 1981 and counselling.

e) Research Tools

The main tools used in the research were classrooms observations and interviews.

Through the use of classroom observations the study sought to examine how the teachers used the syllabus as a curriculum guidance document that indicated objectives they needed to translate into lessons.

The observation schedule used in the pilot study helped me collect useful data that pointed to cultural mediation concepts and activities that were relevant to my research question. I decided to use it for the main study without modifying it significantly (see Appendix 3). History is taught three times a week and schools were visited on days teachers were available. Visits depended on the days that they allocated. Table 7.6 (below) gives a summary of the dates and the number of lessons observed when the schools were visited.

114

Table 7.13: Days when schools were visited and number of lessons observed May - July 2006

Date PBBW PBBD PGDW1 PGDW2 PGBS1 PGBS2 PBDP 29/5/06 * 30/5/06 * * 31/5/06 * 2/6/06 * 6/6/06 * * 8/6/06 * 9/6/06 * * 12/6/06 * * 13/6/06 * * 14/6/06 27/6/06 * 4/7/06 * *

5/7/06 * 12/7/06 * 13/7/06 * 14/7/06 17/7/06 18/7/06 * * 19/7/06 * 20/7/06 * 21/7/06 * 24/7/06 * 25/7/06 * 26/7/06 *

Having witnessed the reluctance to have video-recording during lessons from the teachers and principals of the schools that participated in the pilot study, I resorted to using a tape recorder to audio-record all lessons, the advantage being that what was said was captured and I did not have to depend on memory or notes for a comprehensive record of the lesson observations. Observations were made to capture the nature of the interactions teachers had with, and promoted amongst, learners. The teaching methods they used in the classroom, assessment tasks and the homework they gave were also important. These factors were regarded as reflections of what they considered to be essential for the successful implementation of the objectives of the history syllabus. As

115

Bogdan and Biklen (1982, p.28) stated, “everything has the potential of being a clue which might unlock a more comprehensive understanding of what is being studied.” Involvement in the lessons as a non-participant observer was thus likely to tell me how the teachers understood these objectives. It was particularly useful in discovering whether they did what was expected of them by these objectives and whether they furthered or not the essence of the Kenyan curriculum policy.

In each school I observed four lessons. The first was meant to familiarize the teacher and students of my presence in their lessons. The second lesson was observed and informally discussed with the teachers to provide them with a chance to talk about what they considered to be the requirements of the objectives of the History syllabus they were teaching, and to describe how they thought the teaching strategies they used would help meet these objectives. The assumption was that these initial discussions would draw the teachers’ attention to the importance of the objectives and help them to consciously think about what they needed to do to teach the syllabus successfully. It was reasonable to expect them to understand the purpose of teaching to clarify the hybrid nature of what it meant to be Kenyan. Although brief, the discussions proved necessary to ensure purposeful and rich data (cf. Merriam, 1998; Gall et al., 1999). The third lesson was observed to mainly put the teachers at ease again after having discussed their previous lessons with them. In all the schools the last lessons observed generated the main data for the study. This data also served as an important resource for the focused informal interviews/conversations that were conducted with the teachers after these lessons.

The lessons observed ranged from topics that dealt with Development of Agriculture to The Contacts Between East Africa and the Outside World up to the 19th century. The lesson below is an example of how most classroom interactions took place:

The lesson was observed in School PBBD on 5/7/2006. It took place between 8:45 and 9:25 am in Form One A. There were a total of 54 students, all seated in rows facing the chalkboard. The teacher stood in front of the classroom. The lesson was about The Bantu People in Kenya and the classroom interaction took place as follows:

Teacher: What were we doing last time? We finished the results of the Cushitic migration in Kenya, is that so? Then I had told you to do something on the people of Kenya up to the 19th century and I hope you have read a little on the Bantu people is that so? Learner: Yes. Teacher: So we discuss the topic? Learners: Yes. Teacher: Alright. So can you tell us the meaning of Bantu? Learner: These are a group of people who speak a similar language. Teacher: Yes what else about the Bantu? Learner: They are the largest group in Africa.

116

Teacher: Yes and they occupy about two thirds of Africa south of the Sahara. Yes and what is believed to be their original home? Learner: It is believed that they originated from between eastern Nigeria and the Cameroon. Teacher: Yes it is believed that they originated between eastern Nigeria and the Cameroon an area that is generally referred to as the Congo Basin. O.k. from there, they are believed to have migrated, by the way where is that area where they originated from in the map of Africa? Learner: Central Africa …… (For more details see Appendix 7.)

To corroborate what emerged in the classroom observations, interviews with individual teachers were conducted, allowing them an opportunity to clarify what their intentions were and why they thought their teaching strategies would help fulfil the objectives of the syllabus. Bilmes (1986:108) emphasizes that “action is behavior performed according to an intention, and therefore, it is meaningful”. Interviews were thus to provide teachers with an opportunity to identify and explain the source, if any, of their practices during lessons and what they thought they were doing. They had a chance to explain how the teaching strategies and activities they used were furthering the objectives of the syllabus. An audio tape recorder was used during interviews to ensure that the process moved quickly and responses could later be transcribed verbatim.

Teachers were asked to explain why they taught as they did. As they responded, to make sure that their responses were captured as accurately as possible (Bogdan & Biklen, 1982) I would often probe and encourage them to clarify what they said. An open-ended framework was adjusted to the particular issues that developed in each of the teachers’ lessons and their interpretations of the interactions that occurred during lessons.

Interviews

Interviews were conducted after the last classroom observation for each teacher. They were held at the schools, as this was the most convenient place for both the teachers and myself. Each interview lasted between 30 and 45 minutes. I asked the teachers if I could tape record what they were saying so that I did not miss any of it. The use of a tape-recorder did not replace note taking but it did allow me to make strategic and focused notes rather than attempting verbatim ones. It was also useful later to check “the wording of any statement [she] might wish to quote” (Bell, 1993. p.109). Recordings could also be listened to several times and this facilitated the accurate transcription of the teachers’ accounts.

From the pilot study I realized that it was necessary to use dialogue or the informal conversation interview and not just a standardized open-ended type, which allowed little flexibility in relating the interview to particular moments and individuals. The pilot study made it clear that uninterrupted explanations did constrain and limit the relevance of the responses that were provided by the teachers.

117

The informal conversation interview offered maximum flexibility that enabled me to pursue information in whatever direction it appeared appropriate, depending on what emerged from the observations or from talking to the teachers. This not only deepened the communication but it also allowed me to make use of the immediate surroundings and situations to increase the concreteness and immediacy of the interview questions. I was able to match interviews to individual teachers and circumstances.

Teachers were asked to explain, in particular, their choice of subject content and teaching strategies. The hope was that they would first relate their choice of content to the objectives of the syllabus and then indicate how it was meant to help them demonstrate the interconnectedness amongst the ethnic groups that are found within Kenya in a manner that helped their learners develop an understanding of why they has to see themselves as Kenyan rather than simply belonging to an ethnic group. Probing what they said revealed how their teaching was generally impacted upon by how they understood ethnicity and its value to Kenyan nationhood. They were caught up in a reproductive instead of a developmental process of promoting national unity, to what was already known failed to involve, on their part, a creation of something new. Engaging their minds (Davis et al., 2000) in this way produced data that illuminated what were influential factors that guided their practices.

Even though the interviews were not strictly structured, they were not unfocussed. An interview guide was used (see Appendix 8) to ensure that the same line of inquiry was pursued with each teacher. However, the flexibility within it facilitated spontaneity and responsiveness to individual teachers’ differences and their schools’ circumstances. It enabled me to explore and build a conversation within the specific subject content being taught, and collect precise data about the lesson and meaning construction processes used by the teachers. The flexibility also offered the teachers the opportunity to respond in their own words and to express their own personal perspectives.

Talking to the teachers after the classroom observation, I asked how the interaction was useful to their lesson objectives. Some concentrated on describing the content of their lessons and classroom activities, seemingly unaware of the importance of the way they mediated policy goals of nurturing nationhood through the content they taught and discussions they generated during lessons. They mainly focused on the content of the topics that they had taught and what they considered crucial for the learners to master in terms of examination criteria. For example, when I asked one of the teachers to explain why she taught the way she did, she replied:

Researcher: Would you explain to me the reason why you taught the way you did? Teacher: O.k. The first lesson I was introducing to the learners the topic the Cushites. So generally before allowing them to present or do anything like that I had to explain to them. I had to introduce

118 the topic and discuss it with them and then now when it comes to the various communities I then give the learners the opportunity to present. Researcher: Why do you do that? Why do you allow the students to present? Teacher: So that they know it much better. You know if the teacher just stands there and it is you who keeps talking I think they get bored. Somehow when there is a change then you see them concentrate. And even for the students I think when an exam comes and it is set from what he had presented he will be able to do much better. (see Appendix 9 for the discussions with teachers) To enable teachers to interpret and analyse their teaching practices, I used questions that would encourage them to discuss their teaching and classroom interactions more. With probing they were able to talk about their experiences and highlighted the various difficulties they faced in trying to implement the policy requirements. Table 7.7 (below) gives a summary of the research process described above.

Table 14.7: Summary of the research process

Pilot study Main Study Sampling  2 provincial secondary schools  5 provincial secondary schools  2 teachers  7 teachers  Form One history syllabus Research  Classroom observations six  Classroom participatory Tools lessons from two schools observations 20 lessons from 5  Standardized open-ended schools interviews  Informal Conversational  History syllabus Form One interviews each teacher lasting 30-45 minutes and tape recorded. Aim for  To test and develop the adequacy  To be able to capture teachers’ data of research instruments classroom practices in relation to collection  To enable the researcher to teaching for Kenyanization. design a research protocol and  To be able to find out about assess whether it is realistic and teacher’s explanations and workable. understanding of their practices.

f) Data management, processing and analysis

Patton (2001) points out that doing one’s own interview and observation transcriptions provides an opportunity to become immersed in the data; an experience that generates emergent insights. Typing and organizing handwritten field notes offers a similar insight. Le Compte (2000) too believes that transcribing offers a point of transition between data collection and analysis as part of data management and preparation. For her, the challenge lies in making sense of massive amounts of data that is read as raw information, sifting the trivia from the significant, identifying significant patterns and constructing a framework for communicating the essence of what it reveals. Raw field notes and verbatim transcripts constitute such data. It is in this sense that Merriam (2002) considers data analysis as simultaneous with data collection. We begin analysing data with the first

119 observation, the first interview and the first document accessed in the study. As we do so, adjustments are made along the way, even to the point of re-directing data collection, and to “testing” emerging concepts, themes, and categories against subsequent data (p.14).

In this study there was no clear distinction between the data gathering process and analysis in terms of stages. The process was recursive in the sense that insights gained from the pilot study provided a basis for further inquiry into the teachers’ understanding of the syllabus they were teaching. As a result, whilst the earlier stages tended to be generative, the latter generated a richness that deepened insights into the issues identified and to which teachers referred.

The transcripts of the collected data (observation of lessons and interviews with teachers) were read, cutting out the significant parts and physically sorting them into relevant piles. These were arranged according to the issue participants were discussing, relevant patterns of behaviour observed, or the recurring use of words during lessons. This is a process that Patton (2002) suggests helps the researcher to get a feel for the data and generate insights that are useful to determine its relevance to the research goals. It also helps in the choice of stories or vignettes that best represent the development of themes. Following this guidance, the data was read through until certain words, phrases, sentences, patterns of behaviour and ways of thinking stood out and helped me develop codes, which in this case were phrases that referred to specific ideas. Material that had a bearing on a particular code was separated from the other and placed under the code particularly relevant to the research question (Flick, 1998). This was done without any interpretation on my part. I did not derive variables or categories from existing theories or previous related studies, as I had no intention of verifying existing theories; rather, I looked carefully at the lessons and interviews transcripts and let the categories emerge on their own. The codes were pulled out as explained.

For example, teachers talked about people movements as a crucial element of understanding how the Kenyan nation was constructed, so material on teachers’ lessons in which they were emphasising this, and parts of interview discussions in which they talked about this, were put together. A short phrase taken from what teachers said, such as: “politically one is first and foremost a Kikuyu before being a Kenyan ” was important. From utterances such as “we cannot deal with the history of the Kenyan Nilotes alone without discussing other communities outside Kenya”;” so you have to make them know where each community descended…”; and “You need to focus on unity. Remember we talk of unity in diversity. Yes learners need to see that in as much as they belong to a specific tribe, they cannot stand isolated. Remember we also say divided we fall but united we stand. We need each other as Kenyans regardless of our tribal affiliations”; it was possible to derive a category such as ‘Understanding transculturality as a basis for nurturing nationhood meaningfully’, because of the issue to which they alluded. This generated manageable focused units that took into account different sub-themes reflected by concepts that dealt with the

120 notion of time, position of history as a school subject, learners’ attitude towards the subject, and issue of textbooks. This ensured that the category remained as close as possible to the data. The categories were then looked into in relation to the theoretical models that clarified what needed to be linked into a theme. The themes explained what was required or needed to be prioritized when using historical knowledge to nurture nationhood or citizenship.

Concretely, I needed to create themes that characterized how the teachers taught and their accounts thereof. For example, arriving at a theme such as “Privileging ethnic difference” involved a careful process of cutting and pasting, mixing and matching, triangulating and putting together similar teaching strategies and explanations of them (Le Compte, (2000). This ensured that the study focused on what really happened during lessons and the teachers’ explanations that indicated their understanding of what was crucial in their classroom strategies. The significance of these factors as agents of nation-building could not be underplayed (cf. Goodson, 1994). In short, the research adopted what Lather (1986) calls a ‘reciprocal relationship between data and theory’. She contends that:

data must be allowed to generate propositions in a dialectical manner that permits use of a priori theoretical framework, but which keeps a particular framework from becoming a container into which the data must be poured. The search is for theory which grows out of context-embedded data, not in a way that automatically rejects a priori theory, but in a way that keeps preconceptions from distorting the logic of evidence (Lather, 1986, p.267).

The codes are grounded in the data expressed in the words of the teachers. Even though they spoke about the History subject content as proposed by the objectives of the syllabus, in practice they did not exercise any professional judgment in translating the notion of nurturing nationhood in a critical manner. Despite the rhetoric of the syllabus, they seemed to prioritize ethnic differences and consequently faced serious challenges in implementing the policy of building nationhood by teaching History.

The teachers could not be involved “in either the interpretation of the descriptive data or the construction of empirically grounded theory” (Lather, 1986, p.264) because this was a PhD study and had financial constraints. Returning to schools had financial implications to me as a Kenyan international student registered full time in a South African university. What Gitlin and Russel (1990, p.187) suggest as a way of dealing with this problem gave me the confidence to make my study authentic, that is by ensuring that “the relationship between what is said and the person(s) doing the talking [is]... made apparent”. By indicating when I was expressing a view and when it was the participants who were doing so, efforts were made to prevent the interpretations presented from affecting the data adversely by making it less convincing or legitimate.

121 g) Validity/Transferability and Reliability/ Dependability

Validity or transferability in research has to do with the applicabilty or generalisibilty of research findings whilst reliability or dependability is established through ways of collecting, analyzing and interpreting data whilst (see, for example, Merten, 1998; Miles and Huberman, 1994; Cohen & Manion, 1984; Lather, 1986). As a result, for Lather (1986b, p.26), in educative research “it is undesirable for the procedures to remain unchanged from context to context, given the needs and priorities of a particular population”. In other words, the way research methods are used should depend on the research process at a particular time and in a specific context. Taking this into account, the methods of data collection strengthened the study. They (observations, interviews) were first piloted in a few schools with teachers from schools in the Nairobi province. These were different from those that participated in the main study to guarantee the reliability or dependability of these research tools (Lincoln & Guba, 2002). The pilot study had ensured their validity or transferability to different schools in the province.Their dependability could thus not be doubted (Krefting 2002), as the differences amongst the schools and teachers within Nairobi province proved insignificant when the main study was conducted. The patterns of interactions and attitudes within History and Government lessons were generally characteristic of prevalent cultures within the province amongst the different schools.

The use of classroom observations and interviews was driven by a logic that allowed no single method adequately to reveal different aspects of the Kenyan history teachers’ understanding of the syllabus requirements. I had to be sensitive to the different nuances of the teachers, who they were, and those they taught. Thus, understanding these nuances across different kinds of data was illuminative and offered opportunities for deeper insight into the relationship between their practices, subjectivity and how they were positioned in relation to the requirements of the syllabus. As Potterton (1999) writes:

Both correspondence and discrepancies are of value. If two sources give the same message then, to some extent, they cross-validate each other. If there is discrepancy, its investigation may help in explaining the phenomenon of interest (p.383).

The dependability of data was thus enhanced in a number of ways. First, through a conscious use of a research design that allowed different ways of collecting data on the same subject, so that it could be used to validate the accuracy using another method. This provided a way of “…enriching and completing knowledge and towards transgressing the (always limited) epistemological potentials of the individual method” (Flick, 1998, p.230). For example, it was important to acknowledge the participants’ knowledge of their practices in order to achieve the dependability of data (see also Gitlin, 1990; Lather, 1986b). Their understanding of what was happening, in the words of Gitlin (1990, p.446), “… reorients, focuses, and energizes participants toward knowing

122 reality in order to transform it”. Therefore, in this study, dependability went beyond the truthfulness of data and became “…the degree to which the research process enabled teachers to fully participate in examining their beliefs, actions, … and make changes based on this understanding” (Gitlin, 1990, p.446). By employing dialogue, the study revealed the teachers’ understandings of the aims of the syllabus.

Dependability was therefore attained by combining both interviews and classroom observations. I compared and crosschecked the consistency of insights derived at different times and by different means within these methods. This involved studying classroom observation data from each teacher in each school and crosschecked these with the interview data from each teacher in each school. After this I had to compare and crosscheck both the interviews and observation data from one school to another. Dependability in this case was related to the methods I used in the research process.

h) Ethical issues

Even though informing participants was done in a manner to encourage free choice of participation, the non-judgmental and non-interfering role of the researcher was explained equally to all. To safeguard their rights and dignity, they were personally approached and in a personal dialogue the entire research process was explained. After clarifying the research process, teachers were informed of their freedom to withdraw if they wished. In addition to the verbal explanations, a detailed written consent form was also given to them, to which they could freely consent or not. The consent form also highlighted the data collection methods and the need to tape-record the classroom observations and interview sessions. They were also given assent forms for the parents to allow me to participate in the lessons on behalf of their children.

Anonymity

The study did not use the schools’ or teachers’ real names, but rather pseudonyms were coined for the schools, for example PBBW (as above), and the teachers were referred to as either ‘teacher 1’ or ‘teacher 2’, depending on the number of teachers involved in the study per school. I nevertheless took caution to heed the argument of Muchmore (2001) that this procedure could be a thin disguise, with individuals familiar with the contexts of schools as described in the study being able to recognize the participants. According to Graven (2002) and Merriam (1998), there is indeed tension between providing detailed and rich contextual information that is needed in a qualitative study and compromising the anonymity of the people being researched. Even though this could be the case, I thus made sure that in as much as I was protecting the identity of both the schools and

123 the teachers, I did not provide any false information, either through coining of names or describing the structures.

Balancing this with Muchmore’s argument (2001, p.13), that the practice of disguising participants’ identity is worrying, since it is believed it equals “stripping research participants of their true identities and thus depriving them any credit for their contributions. From this perspective, anonymity is seen as a pernicious tool for marginalizing research participants…”, in this study teachers were not deprived of their identity, and initials of their real names and those of the schools were used as names.

Generalising findings

The findings of this study cannot be generalized to other teachers within Kenya. However, “generalizability is not in every case the goal of a qualitative study, whereas the problem of access may be one of the crucial barriers” (Flick, 1998, p.70). The study did not intend to make generalisations but highlighted crucial issues in terms of the theory-practice nexus (Smith, 1992). In a way, generalising issues raised by the study is left to the particular reader in his/her context, who may feel that although the context is different there are certain things that could be learnt from it. It was hoped that “…the interpretations made, and issues raised in the study may provide concepts and issues worthy of thought in readers’ situations as well” (Mccutcheon, 1981, p.9).

7.4. SUMMARY

This chapter has outlined the research design and methodology, with the methods or interviews and observations falling within a qualitative approach. The sampling of schools and the research population was justified in terms of addressing the research question, measures taken to ensure validity and reliability and adhere to ethical strictures.

The next chapter focuses on what teachers did or did not do in lessons to promote an efficacious sense of nationhood. It highlights how they dealt with historical insensitivities held by learners in the attempt to nurture a Kenyan sense of being amongst them. Of particular interest were the ways in which they engaged with what they took for granted as representative of the different ethnic or tribal groups within their country. The data presented illustrates how they were or were not able to create a context in which these representations could be reflected upon to clarify their history and nature and, subsequently, enable them to understand why they were all parts of a unifying culture of Kenya.

124

CHAPTER 8

ETHNIC DIFFERENCES AS PRIORITY IN TEACHING HISTORY: CHALLENGES IN IMPLEMENTING POLICY

8.1 INTRODUCTION

Evidence presented in this chapter demonstrates that the teachers who participated in the study paid attention mainly to cultural content without encouraging the learners to subject it to critical scrutiny, or to inquire how, why and when it was associated with a particular ethnic or tribal group. The lessons largely underplayed the need to raise learners’ awareness of how their past experiences, histories or positions affected the present, and in turn would inform the future. They (lessons) presented events in which learners seemed to be encouraged by a variety of motives and private purposes to emphasize their ethnic or tribal uniqueness. Instead of teachers using their sense of uniqueness to clarify the structural and other regularities that interpenetrated it, and so establish the primacy of inter-dependedness, the opportunity was lost. Many of the teachers seemed to ascribe ethnic identity to pre-given, irreducible, scripted and historical cultural traits. All the lessons dealt with the taken-for-granted views of the learners in ways that underplayed the importance of the interface and exchange of cultural performances that had occurred amongst the different ethnic groups. This uncritical and largely commonsensical way in which ethnicity seemed to be dealt with in some lessons, thus initially underplayed the importance of the interactions that historically occurred amongst different cultural representations. Instead of encouraging, as Homi Bhabha (1994) suggests, discussions and reflective interaction through which ideas, values, and meaning clashes could be examined to see how they became reified historically, teachers first concentrated on the representations merely as storehouses of experience on the basis of which clans and ethnic communities developed. Even though there were attempts to assist learners understand the interconnectedness of the different ethnic/tribal cultural symbols and perspectives and understand what distinguished their tribal/ethnic communities, teachers seemed not to emphasize the development of a deeper understanding of how these representations were interrelated so as to enable learners grasp the idea of nationhood that the Kenyan government seeks to be realized. Extracts from lessons that were observed provide details of how they engaged with the learners’ cultural representations. A selection from first, Lenana schools, is presented to exemplify how ethnic or tribal uniqueness was emphasized during lessons. Three are presented as examples.

125

8.2 EMPHASIS ON ETHNICITY

In the excerpts from various lessons, learners seemed to understand ethnicity or tribal affiliations in Kenya as having been in constant redefinition by members of groups that interacted whilst the current sense of being Kenyan was being constructed. They expressed their different understanding informed by their different experiences to which they are exposed within society. The teachers clearly took advantage of these positions and urged them to clarify their understanding of what made the Kenyan society? It was important to establish how they understood the relationship and interconnectedness of what they still considered as the different institutionalized ethnic representations. This seemed to be a common approach across the two schools. However, for these teachers to strengthen an understanding of the interconnectedness of ethnic groups as a basis from which to nurture nationhood meaningfully, the History content they taught had to be looked at as political, historical and autobiographical texts by the learners. They were not to view it as historical events that simply needed to be known , but they had to be subjected to critical scrutiny in order for the learners to understand how the resulting interactions that occurred within the different ethnic groups within Kenya had significance to the current to how they had been socialized to understand their history, identity and the politics of their country. But lessons seemed not to have planned to provide adequate time for developing such an understanding. Examples are presented below:

8.2.1 Lesson ( PBBD- [05/07/2006])

The lesson was in Form OneA between 3.55 pm. and 4.35pm. The class had 50 students.

Learner: Okay. Today we are going to look at the Nilotic speakers, these are the river-lake Nilotes and these are basically the Luos in Kenya and then, they are divided into four groups according to the way they arrived in Kenya. These are the Joka-Jok, the Joka-Owiny, the Joka-Omolo and the Abasuba. Okay. The river lake Nilotes – oh sorry. Okay. The Joka – Jok stand for the people of Jok and Jo means people, Ka means of so Joka means the people of so Joka Jok means the people of Jok. So they were the first ones to move out of Uganda and settled in the Ramogi hills and also they settled in Siaya district in Nyanza province. Aaa later on, when they had settled, two of Jok sons aaa mmm moved to South Nyanza to Winam Gulf to form the Karachuonyo and the Wanchare clans and Karachuonyo is found in South Nyanza. So they went then and then they spread to other places like Sakwa, Alego, Asembo and other parts of Nyanza. Okay. Their migration was fuelled by internal conflicts …

Teacher (interrupting): what does the word Jok mean?

Learner: … Jok means okay, Joka means people of and so Joka-Jok means people of Jok.

126

Teacher: Joka Owiny means the people of (class responds: Owiny).

Teacher: Joka Omolo – (class:) people of Omolo.

Learner: Okay. Now we go to Joka Owiny. Okay. These people and this group moved from Uganda and settled in Sogoma in Alego. So Owiny was both a great father and a leader in, sorry, a leader in Kijaluo yah, is called Ruoth.

Teacher: Ruoth?

Learner: Yes Ruoth.

Teacher: Jaduong then means what?

Learner: The big one, that Jaduong is the big one and Ruoth is the leader, so like Mercy our class captain is our leader (class laughs. So we can refer to her as Ruoth). And his name might be the place named Owiny Sigoma so when they settled in Sigoma they changed the name of that place to be Owiny Sigoma and his people were also referred to as Joka Ruoth meaning?

Class: People of Ruoth.

Learner: Yes, the people of the leader. Okay. They settled in Kisumu, Nyakach and South Nyanza. And yah okay that is about Joka Owiny. So we go to Joka Omolo who are the people of …

Class responds: Omolo.

Learner: Okay. They came from northern Bunyore which is in Uganda settling temporarily in Buganda and Bukoli before moving on to Ugenya and Gem. As they migrated they encountered the Abagusii and Abalogoli then Aboo ... Yes Abalogoli then they fought with them forcing them to move out, so they got that land after that fight. They chased them out of Yimbo then they spread to Alego and some of the family also went to Winam gulf in South Nyanza.

Okay. After that we go to the Abasuba. Okay. We know that the Abasuba were Bantus, were Bantus but okay. They migrated when the Bantu refugees migrated and came to Kenya, they found the Luo then they interacted and married so they became a group of River-lake Nilotes.

Teacher: But do we still have the Abasuba?

Learner: Okay. They they …

Teacher: Or they have been absorbed by the Luo?

Learner: Yes, they have been absorbed by the Luo. Nearly everything that they do is like the Luos.

Teacher: Their names, the way they talk?

Learner: Yes. Bantu refugees, these are the Abasuba who moved from Uganda. Okay. They intermarried with the Luos. As I had said, then they settled in Lake Victoria islands which are

127

Mfungamano and Rusinga. They also settled in Gwasi area. Okay. Now we will go to the effects. Okay does anybody have any questions?

Teacher: Are these people Kenyans?

Learner: Yes, they are Kenyans.

Teacher: But you said they came from Uganda so are they Ugandans or Kenyans?

Learner: We have been tracing their movement from where they came from before they finally settled in Kenya.

Teacher: So what makes them Kenyans?

Learner: The fact that they moved here long ago and settled.

Teacher: So are you saying that you are both a Kenyan and a Luo?

Learner: Yes, we are Luos and we are also Kenyans. Luo is our tribe, our ethnic community but as a Kenyan we are part of a broader society.

Teacher: Yes, that is a good question; why do we consider these people to be Kenyans? We have studied most communities and we all seem to be saying that each community moved from somewhere before settling in Kenya so what makes these communities to consider themselves Kenyans?

Learner: Every community originated from somewhere and for different reasons they settled in Kenya and interacted with each other. Even though they may have been different they started sharing, I mean interacting through trade, marriage and these led to the formation of another community, the Kenyan community.

Teacher: Yes, so you are saying that communities interacted and became more of one big society than the divided groups?

Learner: Yes.

Learner: We belong to different tribes, I’m a Kikuyu and she is a Luo and she is a Luyhia but because we share the same land, we have common practices, common interests then that unite us and we see ourselves as Kenyans. ...

Teacher: That is what we want to find out. Who are you? Are you a Kenyan or are you a Kikuyu or a Luo?

Learner: I think we are both.

Learner: Being Kenyan means all these things. You cannot just be Kenyan without belonging to a particular community. That is what makes Kenya. Without these communities we would not have Kenya. 128

Teacher: So what are you saying?

Learner: That we are Kenyans and we are also from different communities.

Learner: I don’t think it matters any more. I think long time ago it was important but now times have changed and people just call themselves Kenyans.

Learner: Yes we have many people living in Kenya now like the Asians, whites and other people from other countries and they are Kenyan. So I don’t think that it is just about tribe I think today we belong to a nation and not a tribe.

Learner: Teacher, look at the International competitions, nobody says that so and so is from the Kalenjin community, they say Kenyan. We are recognized by our country and not ethnic background.

Teacher: Yes, what you are all saying is correct but I would like all of us to reflect on this, the question of who we are. Discuss among yourselves what forms your identity. We will discuss that in our next lesson. Let the Luos continue with their presentation. (The lesson proceeds with the Luo students’ presentation).

There follows another example:

8.2.2 Lesson (PBBD - [05/07/2006])

The lesson was in Form OneA between 9:30 and 10:10 am. There were 54 students in class, all seated in rows of two facing the chalkboard. The teacher spent the first five minutes reviewing the previous lesson, which was about the Effects of Luo Migration in Kenya. She then continued with the topic of the day, which was about The Plain Nilotes. The lesson proceeded as follows:

Teacher: Let us look at the plain Nilotes. (Teacher writes the words The Plain Nilotes on the board) This group includes such people as (learners raise their hands) Yes one at a time yes.

Learner: Masai.

Learner: Samburu.

Learner: Iteso.

Learner: Njemps.

Learner: Karamojong.

Teacher: Are they also included in this group?

Learner: Teacher, they are Nilotes.

129

Teacher: Are they Kenyans? We are only dealing with Kenyans. (At this point the learners start to argue, some say that the Karamojong are not Kenyans, some that they are found at the border of Kenya, and some that they are found in the three countries, Kenya Uganda and Tanzania).

Learner: Yes they are found both in Kenya and Uganda and even in Tanzania.

Teacher: The Maasai is the major group and they are referred to as the maa speaking. They are people who speak closely related languages. When did they arrive in Kenya?

Learner: In one thousand AD.

Teacher: Where did they come from? What was their home?

Learner: Area north of Lake Turkana.

Teacher: Why did they move? What is the main reason for their movement?

Learner: They were pastoralists so they needed pasture for their animals.

Teacher: Yes they needed fresh grazing land and water for their herds. Besides that what other factors made them to migrate? If you have answered a question put down your hand so that I can pick those who have not talked.

Learner: Diseases and epidemics.

Teacher: They were running away from diseases and epidemics that affected both human and cattle. So anything affecting them, they were just running from and then as they ran away and moved away made them migrate from one place to another. Yes, another factor? Yes, tell us the reason why they were migrating.

Learner: They migrated to escape from external attacks....

Teacher: Yes they kept on moving southwards and finally they settled in Uganda in Mount Moroto in the eastern Uganda around one thousand AD. And it is from this group that other plain Nilotes groups emerged, what groups were these?.... They did not rest there they continued to expand such that the beginning of the nineteenth century where had they settled and when did they settle by the end of the eighteenth century?

Learner: Western Kenya.

Teacher: What happened?

Learner: They were pushed out by the Bantu southwards.

Teacher: The Turkana of Kenya where did they come from?

Learner: Mount Moroto in Uganda.

130

Teacher: Yes, both in Kenya and Uganda. They are still pastoralists so still move in both Kenya and Uganda. So that is basically about the plain Nilotes. Let us look at the Maasai; they are closely associated with the original Kalenjin speaking communities and what is their original home?

Learner: North of Lake Turkana.

Teacher: Original home of the Maasai is like the other plain Nilotes north of Lake Turkana but the Maasai developed differently as it is shown by the kind of different language they speak from the rest of the plain Nilotes and also their culture is different from those of the plain Nilotes. Now when did the Maasai move around what time?...

Learner: eighteen hundred.

Teacher: They moved around eighteen hundred and they moved southwards now where did they pass?

Learner: Southwards from Mt Elgon...

Teacher: . This southwards movement took them as far as where?

Learner: Uasin Gishu.

Teacher: But they did not stop there they continued to move until they reached where?

Learner: Moved until they reached Tanzania.

Teacher: As they moved who did they interact with?

Learner: Sirikwa people.

Teacher: Yes they interacted and throughout the eighteenth century they could be found throughout East Africa especially in the Rift Valley and as they moved would fight anybody who showed resistance, which communities were these?

(Learners shout out the names of the communities- Kalenjins, Akamba, Abagusi)…

Teacher: Following the death of their father, Sendenyo and Lenana had differences between them that led to the division of the Maasai community...

Teacher: Yes the Nandi were growing as a power and this affected the Maasai.

Note these points down. Any question?

From this interaction, the learners were encouraged to start thinking about what distinguishes one ethnic group from another. This began a reflective process in which the learners were encouraged

131 to focusing on the interaction that had occurred amongst the different ethnic groups. The lesson developed as illustrated below:

Teacher: You mentioned earlier that the Maasai interacted with different communities. What forms of interaction did they have?

Learner: They inter-married with other communities like the Kalenjin.

Learner: It also led to cultural exchange like the practice of circumcision.

Learner: They also borrowed practices like the position of the Laibon was a practice from the Kalenjins who had Orkoiyot.

Learner: The Kwavi borrowed farming practices from their Bantu neighbours like the Gussii.

Teacher: From what you are saying can we still talk of a “pure” Maasai community?

Learners: No.

Teacher: Do we really have “pure” communities?

Learner: I don’t think so because all communities interacted with one another at one point or the other and with each interaction they learnt new things like trade, farming skills and this changed their original way of doing things.

Teacher: If by eighteen hundred these communities were already interacting with each other, after all these years, what type of Maasais do you think we have? Do we have any Maasai?

Learner: Yes.

Teacher: What makes you different from the early group of the Maasai?

Learner: Some of us are not pastoralist any more.

Teacher: Yes and why is that so?

Learner: My parents live here in Nairobi and we do not keep cattle so we do not have to move from one place to another looking for pasture.

Teacher: Yes, economic practices have changed and as we had pointed out earlier their economic activities were related to their social and political activities. (Continues) Now, what makes you a Maasai?

Learner: My language.

Teacher: (Asks three boys who they are. One says Kalenjin, the other Kikuyu and the last one Luyhia. All the three believe that their language makes them part of a specific tribe and not another). Now if language makes us different, then why do we call ourselves Kenyans?

132

Learner: That is what unites us.

Learner: We are different as in different tribes but we all live in the same country so we are all Kenyans. (The bell rings - end of lesson).

Teacher: I want you to start thinking in terms of that. What do we mean when we declare ourselves Kenyans or as you have just said different from other people because of our language? What makes us Kenyans? Is it the fact that we live in the same country or does it mean more than that? Discuss this we will continue during our next lesson.

8.2.3 Lesson (PBBW [13/06/2006])

The lesson occurred between 2:40 and 3:20 pm. There were 50 students in class, all seated in rows facing the chalkboard. It began with the teachers remarking to the researcher:

Teacher: (talking to researcher) before you came we looked at the effects of the Bantu migration. So can we remind ourselves of some of the effects of the Bantu migration? Yes?

Teacher: Yes, the Bantu were engaged in iron working so when they moved from one place to another they spread the skill to the other people. Any other effects? Yes.

Learner: It led to intermarriages.

Teacher: Yes it led to intermarriages, the Bantu married the Nilotes and they also married some Cushites. Any other effects?

Learner: It led to agricultural practices.

Teacher: Yes.

Learner: It led to population increase.

Teacher: Yes it led to population increase in the places that they settled in because when they moved to those places there were also people in those areas. Yes?

Learner: It also led to community conflicts.

Teacher: Yah, their migration led to community conflicts. You know when you go to an area the people who you find there obviously have to fight with you. Which are some of the communities that the Bantu fought?

Learner: Dorobo.

Teacher: Yes, they fought some Cushites like the Dorobo. In some cases they defeated them and in some cases they were defeated.....

133

Teacher: Yes the Masai. Today we are going to look at the Cushitic under the Cushitic speakers. We will look at the Eastern Cushites, the Southern Cushites and then we will find out why the Cushites migrated. So let us first remind ourselves of the Cushitic speakers. (Teacher writes on the board, the word “Cushites”).

Who are the Cushitic speakers? The Cushites are people who speak closely related languages and where did they come from? Where did the Cushites come from?

Learner: Horn of Africa.

Teacher: Yes and where did the others come from?

Learner: South East Ethiopia.

Teacher: Yah, the horn of Africa and South East Ethiopia. So, where did these people trace their origin? Where is their original homeland?

Learner: It is found in North East Africa.

Teacher: The Cushites are divided into two main groups.

Learner: Southern and eastern Cushites.

Teacher: Yes, the southern and eastern Cushites. Let us look at the southern Cushites. Their original homeland is found in northeast Africa. And we said that the Cushites are divided into two main groups and which groups are these?

Learner: Southern and eastern Cushites.

Teacher: (writes southern “Cushites” on the board) so we said that there are eastern and southern Cushites and it appears that the southern Cushites arrived in Kenya earlier than the eastern Cushites. So these groups moved from southern Ethiopia highlands. They moved from southern highlands and by the end of the nineteenth century it is said that they were completely absorbed by the Bantus. What does this mean? We said that when somebody is absorbed then what happens?

Learner: They are assimilated.

Teacher: Yes, but what do you mean by assimilation? What happens to somebody who is assimilated or absorbed? Yes.

Learner: You do what they do.

Teacher: Yes, when you are assimilated by somebody then you speak their language, you eat their food, you dress the way they do and you practice everything that they are engaged in. Yes so these people moved from the vast northern Kenyan plains through the Nyika plateau and then some settled in the northern part of Tanzania. They migrated into Kenya in two groups that is the

134 southern and eastern Cushites. The southern Cushites came where did they settle? Of course their movement had to be southwards and where did they settle?

Learner: Kenyan highlands.

Teacher: Yes they settled in Kenyan highlands and where did others settle?

Learner: Plains.

Teacher: Yes some settled in the plains (writes on board) some did not settle in Kenya, where did the others settle?

Learner: Northern Tanzania.

Teacher: Yeh some settled in the northern part of Tanzania. They say that the southern Cushites were assimilated but not all Cushites were absorbed, there was a particular group that was not assimilated, who were these?

Learner: The Daholo.

Teacher: (Writes on board) Yes these were the Daholo.

Teacher: Yes where are these people found?

Learner: Along River Tana.

Teacher: That is all about the group – yes ... (Student interrupts).

Learner: There is also another group.

Teacher: Yes which one is this?

Learner: I didn’t get the name (other students disagree with him).

Teacher: Where did you get this information?

Learner: G.H.C.BOOK primary 7.

Teacher: Well, he might be right, why are you all rejecting his point and yet you do not know? The primary knowledge is not useless. Whatever you learnt in primary is still useful and relevant. So we will have to confirm it, if whatever he is saying is correct or not. Now let us look at the Eastern Cushites (writes Eastern Cushites on the board) what group forms the eastern Cushites?

Learner: Randile

Teacher: Randile or Rendile? How do you pronounce it? Yes ... (the teacher writes names on the board as learners say them out). Who are they? (learners respond....)

135

Teacher: Yes we have the Galla, Somali, Borana, Oromo, Gabra, Buji; those are some of the examples of the eastern Cushites. So these eastern Cushites are said to have settled in the horn of Africa after migrating from?

Learner: In Arabia.

Teacher: Yes they migrated from Arabia and when did they migrate from Arabia?

Learner: In one thousand B.C.

Teacher: Yah, they settled in the horn of Africa after migrating from Arabia in the year 1000B.C. They migrated southwards into the modern area of Somali and then settled in the northern borders of Kenya in the first millennium...

Teacher: Yes a thousand years. Yes when the Rendile came to Kenya where did they settle?

Learner: In the eastern part of Lake Turkana.

Teacher: Aaah, which part aaah which part?

Learner: Western part of Lake Turkana.

Teacher: Do we have anybody who is a Rendile here? Who is a Rendile?

(A student raises his hands he says his mother is from the Rendile but the father is a Kissi).

Teacher: So you are not a Rendile you are Kissi.

Teacher: Where did the Oromo and Somali settle?

Learner: Shores of Lake Turkana.

Teacher: Do we have any Turkana? (Class- no one) Who has ever been to Lake Turkana? (A learner raises his hand.) Have you seen the lake?

Learner: Yes.

Teacher: How big is it?

Learner: It is big but I can’t say how much.

Teacher: We are saying that the Somali settled in the eastern shores of Lake Turkana while the Rendile settled on the western shores of Lake Turkana. So the Oromo moved from the area where they had settled. It is said that they settled in the east. They moved southwards, what were they looking for? Learner: They were looking for better pasture. Teacher: Yes the Oromo moved southwards in search of pasture and when did they arrive in Kenya?

136

Learner: In the sixteeenth century.

Teacher: Yes, the Oromo arrived in Kenya in the sixteeenth century (writes on board). When they attempted to move eastwards they were stopped by a certain group. Which group stopped their movement eastwards?

Learner: The Somali.

Teacher: When they reached the coast, they came into contact with another group. Which group was it- I mean at the coast?

Learner: The Miji Kenda.

Teacher: Who belongs to the Bantu group? Yes, their movement eastwards was stopped by the Somali and as result they decided to move to the south westwards but were stopped by the Miji- kenda who are Bantus. What happened when they met the Bantu?

Learner: Intermarried?

Teacher: No before that?

Learner: They fought the Bantu.

Teacher: Yes, the Oromo were very strong. They defeated the Bantu and were able to settle in that particular place. The Oromo are known to be very aggressive. Do we have any Oromo here? (No response from the class) The conflicts between the Oromo and the Somali continued until the beginning of the twentieth century. Do they still have conflicts? Well, it is said that the conflict between them were settled and they now live in their present homeland. Let us look at the reasons for the migration of the eastern Cushites. (Teacher writes on the board).

Teacher: Reasons for the migration of the Eastern Cushites. Why did they move from their original home?

Learner: They were escaping from clan and family feuds. (Teacher writes on the board)...

(Teacher writes learners’ response on the board)

Teacher: We said that the first reason for migration was clan and family feuds. Secondly there was population pressure in their area of origin and then they were searching for better grazing land, fourthly, they were running away from the outbreak of diseases and these diseases were affecting both animals and humans. And then they were escaping from famine and drought. They were also displeased from the constant attacks from their neighbours. So who were some of their neighbours who were always attacking them? Yes?

Learner: The Somali.

137

Teacher: ... So we have looked at the examples of the Oromo, Borana, and Somali, so since we have run short of time, I would like you to divide yourselves into groups, actually the very groups you were in, so the first group you look at the Oromo, the next and plus these two (asks one learner- are you in the group?) Okay the four of you will look at the Borana, then from Okello up to Olango you will look at the Somali and then from there we move to which group? Aaah the next group you look at River-Lake Nilotes. You will look at the Joka Jok then this group will look at the Joka Owiny then the next group will look at the Joka Omolo and the next Luo Abasuba. There is a group, which is left without an assignment. As the last group look at the Nandi. And then who would like to tell us about the Kipsigis? Do we have anybody who is a kipsigis? Let somebody volunteer, who would like to tell us about the Kipsigis? (A learner volunteers). Yes thank you - you will tell us about the Kipsigis in next time. (The bell rings and the learners leave the classroom for the next lesson).

According to Gramsci (1971), to bring change in human behaviour, common sense needs to be shaped to a more refined principled world view. In the context of this study, the view implied that for teachers to promote an understanding of the complex nature of Kenyan nationhood, they needed to encourage reflection on the taken for granted ethnic representations and views held about them. These were what learners expressed about the different ethnic groups. Pinar (2004) sees this as an ability to employ subject content to enrich understanding through encouraging engagement with knowledge, reflection on it and acting in response to the insights gained. Young (1996) has also highlighted the importance the importance of such democratic communication for developing understanding through speaking across differences to clarify the partiality of individidual perspective and expand it by questioning and challenging iton the basis of differently situated knowledge. Threfore, the absence of deliberation across the different ethnic perspectives expressed during the lessons provided above, compromised their transformation. As perspectives that reflected the partial and parochial interests and ideas of the different ethnic groups in the classroom, they needed to be subjected to reflective judgment to create suitable conditions for the self-development of the learners. The classroom and lessons as social context ought to have been used as a forum in which respect for others as individuals with purposes of their own and respect for their rights could have been established. This would be a development characterized by what Rawls (1996) calls the sense of justice. Carr and Hartnett (1996) described it as initiation into the values, attitudes and modes of behaviour appropriate to democratic citizenship and conducive to active participation in democratic institutions. Therefore, cultivating the knowledge, skills and attitudes necessary for Kenyan nationhood required teaching strategies that fostered forms of critical and explanatory learning that wouldhave facilitated a reappraisal of taken for granted norms and critical refection on social, political and economic institutions in contemporary Kenyan ethnic groups. It required participatory rather than conversational teaching methods. It is in this sense that

138

Laclau and Mouffe’s (1985) see identity as wholly constructed through a discourse that enables individuals to experience the ways in which they are positioned within the social structures and no longer act as passive recipient of rights whose freedom resides in the sphere in which the sovereign remains silent. For Mouffe (2000) the construction of such an identity through negotiating a new set of shared community values would promote citizenship that is shaped by other memberships and in turn shapes them as well.

In Giroux’s (1998) view, in the context of schools such negotiation promotes the meaning of culture and identity through communication that relates what is taught to everyday concerns that are linked to the wider stugglesof democracy (also see Giroux and McLaren (1989 on this point). These would be insights which would constitute the basis of what Gramsci (1971) calls “good sense”. In the context of this study, it is reasonable to conclude that in the lessons outlined above, the teachers ran out of time to develop goodsense.

Miller (2000) asserts that in the modern world, wherein solidarity is generated among the populations of states because it is impossible to enjoy relations that rely on kinship they tend to believe that they have an identity. As an illusion, the belief enables those who would otherwise feel isolated and anonymous to feel a part of a larger community. For this reason, it was important for learners to understand why, how, by whom, and for what they believed as they did. As Seixas and Cook (2000) suggest, it was important that the representations and positions that were specific to their particular clans and communities, as social constructs, be drawn upon to initiate a disciplined inquiry that encouraged them to reflect on the sources of how and why they culturally defined themselves as they did and before drawing conclusions also try to determine who and for what purpose promoted the institutionalization of their clans and communities. John White (1996) too expects teachers of History to help pupils discover who they are. Failure to do so, in his view, risks leaving them confused about who and why they are defined in certain ways.

Howkins (1989) as well believes that in teaching national history, the course should set up the nation as the object of study, problematize the very idea, and then examine aspects of that problem in more details. In applying historical knowledge, learners need to be engaged in the debate about their nationality and the future of their national community. However, Yael Tamir (1993) insists that this should be a process that also enhances understanding of other people, within a local and wider context, to promote reflection as a basis for political self-determination as well as a non- chauvinist welcoming of national attachments on the part of those outside one’s ethnicity. This is also Enslin’s (1999) position as, when writing in the context of South Africa, she emphasizes that if learners are made to understand how national myths and histories have come about, and how they are affected by them, it will be possible to create a sense of choice and autonomy necessary for a positive identity. Education should promote only knowledge and not belief, because autonomy requires that beliefs rest on reasons or evidence for holding them to be true. The beliefs

139 should also be held provisionally, in case rational reflection on some new evidence or argument was to persuade them to reconsider them.

If this is inquiry that should be developed to create an understanding of nationhood as a basis for self-determination and further development, the teaching that is examined in the lessons above should not have been merely about the reduction of historical accounts (Boix-Mansilla, 2000), but ought to have been encouraging learners inquire into their sense of being in order to understand reasons for its institutionalization as a historical fact. The concerns expressed here have been dealt with quite insightfully by writers who view History as an interpretative discipline. For example, Tosh (1991), Jenkins (1991), Collingwood (1993) and Appleby (1994) believe that since History is a reconstruction of the past by an historian, it will always reflect the partiality and interest of a particular writer. The argument is that historical knowledge is unlikely to be beyond controversy (cf. Collingwood, 1993), and since the sources do not recapture a past situation in its entirety, the sense of historical context depends also on an imaginative flair, which will vary according to the insight and experience of the individual scholars (Tosh, 1991, p.151). In situations where teachers occupy this space, they need to have the courage to look critically at the institutions that exist within their society, and are viewed as transcending time and history. Even though a people’s sense of identity demands roots in the past, as Tosh (1991) argues, a sense of what is practicable in the future is only formed by an awareness of what happened in the past. Therefore, a History curriculum should employ a perspective on the past that illuminates for learners their present, rather than obscures it. Teachers in these lessons needed to know that the history content they were teaching, as the data demonstrates, lay inertly within learners’ consciousness and made up their knowledge of how they thought they were part of Kenya. Totting it up in a formal way as a History lesson ought to have evoked a new disposition, aimed at creating a richer and more realistic perception of what being Kenyan involved, namely, living in a world beyond a situation in which ethnic absolutism was a fallacy and not useful to building their country. They might also have been encouraged to think of how they might identify with wider geo-political entities of which they are part, such as the African Union, albeit currently embryonic, the Commonwealth and the United Nations. However, the same could not be said of the following lessons that were presented in the Loreto Msongari schools. Here teachers deliberately focussed on ethnic interactions to develop a much more refined understanding of ethnic representations.

8.3 PROMOTING A REFINED UNDERSTANDING OF ETHNIC REPRESENTATIONS

The approaches used by the techers produced classroom interactions that exposed the learners, earlier in the lessons, to ways of reflecting and being critical of the already existing understandings

140 of ethnic identities within Kenya. Classroom praxis (Gramsci, 1971) generated conceptions of ethnicity that seemed to make the notion of Kenyan identity achievable.The discussions that occurred in the lessons reflected the teachers’efforts to make it “. …actual and live[s] historically (that is socially and no longer just in the brains of individuals), … become[s] necessary - rational - real” (p. 369) as illustrated below:

8.3.1 Lesson (PGDW1 – [29/05/2006])

The lesson was presented between 11.00 and 11.40 a.m to 32 students in forms 1 A. The topic was ‘The People of Kenya up to 19th Century’. It began as follows:

Teacher: Welcome back to school, aah and we are still continuing with our topic which we started last week in connection with The People of Kenya up to the Nineteenth Century. Before we start on our lesson this morning, I would like us to have a review of what we had covered last week in connection with the Bantu. I remember we concluded the Bantus by analysing the results or effects of the Bantu migration. .... Yes, what were the main results or effects of Bantu migration in Kenya as a country?

W: The spread of iron-working.

Teacher: Yes ****

N: There was population increase.

Teacher: Yes****.

S: community conflicts.

Teacher: What might have caused the increase in inter-community conflict? S has just stated that there was inter-community conflict.

M: Different cultures and practices.

Teacher: Yes, because they were coming with different practices that were conflicting in one way or the other. We can also say that they were having good weapons to fight their weak neighbours. What else can we say was the main cause of conflict of the Bantu migration? (Learner says something but not loud enough).

Teacher: Pardon?

Learner (repeats): Scramble for land? Small quantity of land?

Teacher: Why? What might have caused small quantity of land?

141

Learner: Population increase.

Teacher: Yes, population increase, that point is supported very clearly here there was shortage of land. What else? Yes from the back (referring to the learner seated at the back of the classroom).

Learner: Intermarriage between communities.

Teacher: Yah, intermarriages from different communities, very good, that means that there was clear interaction between communities, people were in good terms therefore they intermarried. Yes? .....

(The teacher moves towards the board and writes the title ‘Nilotes’ on the board. Faces the learners and asks them the question ‘Who are the Nilotes?’ (No response from the class though there is a lot of murmuring from the students).

Teacher: I had highlighted a bit about the linguistics. We said it is a linguistic word and it refers to the people who speak similar language and we also said that they can be classified into three broad categories. Yes ****?

J: River-lake Nilotes

Teacher: Another ****?

E.G: Plain Nilotes.

Teacher: Yes ****?

M: Highland Nilotes.

Teacher: If we can classify them in those three areas (teacher then writes ‘River lake Nilotes, plain Nilotes highland Nilotes’ on the board. The students are murmuring).

Teacher: How do we get to know about their migration? Where do we get the information from?

Learner: From archaeological evidence. (Teacher writes this on the board).

Teacher: From which other source?

Learner: From the anthropologists.

Teacher: Yes from the anthropologists ****.

K: Oral tradition.

Teacher: Yes ****?

H: (learner says something but not audible)

Teacher: Pardon?

H: Linguistics.

142

Teacher: Yes from linguistics. All these are sources of information; they give us information about the past events of man. We can therefore be able to know that the Nilotes originated from south west Ethiopia (teacher writes ‘south west Ethiopia’ on the board then talks to the students). We can put the point down that according to the archaeologists and other sources of historical information the Nilotes are believed to have believed to have originated from the West Ethiopian Highland. Ethiopia is a neighbouring country. We can call this a dispersal point of the Nilotes (teacher writes ‘dispersal point’ on the board). Therefore the region which is near Lake Turkana became a dispersal point of the Kenyan Nilotes.

Teacher: What do you understand of dispersal point?

Learner: Where they broke up into the three groups.

(Lesson ends)

8.3.2 Lesson (PGDW1- [31/05/2006])

This lesson was due to start at 8.15 and last up to 9.30 a.m. for 31 students in form 1A. It was delayed to 8.35 because of longer than usual prayers at the morning assembly. It was a continuation of a lesson that had provided more content bout the Nilotes. It started with a review of what had already been covered with the teacher giving a summarising this content and then asking:

Teacher: ... Now let me see if you can remember these groups that we highlighted.

Learner: The Acholi.

Teacher: We have the Acholi and we said the Acholi are found in which country? Yes.

Learner: Uganda.

Teacher: Yes the Acholi the majority of them are found in Uganda. Yes the second group?

Learner: The Jopaluo.

Teacher: Yes the Jopaluo very good. (K you had put up your hand).

K: The Joka Owiny.

Teacher: Not yet, we have not yet classified the Kenyan Luo.

Learner: The Dinka.

Teacher: Yes the Dinka, we also find the Dinka in parts of Sudan. (Teacher calls learner by name).

S.M.: Shinuk.

Teacher: ... very good who else. (Learners raise their hands). Now all your hands are up, who is ready to answer? (Learners: ‘me’, ‘me’). Yes, W?

143

W: Nuer.

Teacher: yes Nuer then we go down to yes A.

A: Amok.

Teacher: Yes the Amok very good yes who else?

Learner: Jopadhola.

Teacher: Yes, right Jopadhola, we call them Jopadhola. Now we are going to deal with what we call the general feeling of the River-Lake Nilotes. According to the oral traditions many in thisove group are believed to have migrated from Bahr-el-Ghazal in southern Sudan. So we can say that this is what we call the original dispersal point. This is according to the oral traditions and other forms of historical information. So what might have made them migrate from this region, from southern Sudan? ... which made them migrate into various parts of Uganda and Kenya. We are not going to repeat exactly what we had covered earlier. .... remember we are not dealing with the whole group of the River-lake Nilotes but with the Kenyan Luo. Now let us go to the topic of discussion, it is stated clearly that The People of Kenya up to the Nineteenth Century, so we are not going to deal with the people who settled in Uganda or those Luos who were left in Sudan but we shall deal with the Kenyan Luo because this is the group we are much interested in. ... the Kenyan Luo migrated from southern Sudan into a place called Pabungu Pakwach in Uganda. Remember this information is received from the oral traditions, that the Kenyan Luo migrated from Sudan to Pabungu Pakwach. ... migration and settlement took place around A.D. fourteen fifty. Later on they moved into Kenya. Remember that this kind of information cannot be doubted, there is research done by people in relation to the beliefs of the community. Pabungu Pakwach may not be an area that we cannot trace in the modern Ugandan Map but it is the belief of the people that actually that is where their ancestors might have settled before coming to Kenya. So generally speaking assuming that the Kenyan Luo had settled in Kenya by fourteen fifty, let’s look at the reasons that made the Luos migrate from Pabungu Pakwach. Although we had done the Nilotes in general, I think it is only fair to deal with the topic we are dealing with in relation to the topic of discussion. What are the main reasons that made the Luo to migrate from Pabungu Pakwach? These are just general views. The Nilotes generally had migrated for many reasons. Let us see Kenyan Luo - particular reasons ... Yes one?

Learner: Population increase.

Teacher: There was high population pressure. That is very good. A very strong point. What else can we say made them to migrate, what else? S***?

S: Bad weather.

144

Teacher: She says bad weather, maybe instead of just saying that it is drought and famine which was as a result of bad weather. Yes?

Learner: Internal conflicts.

Teacher: Yes internal conflicts. M*** what is internal conflict?

M: Where the members of the tribe do not go to war but they do not agree among themselves.

Teacher: Yes, that is very good, it may occur between the same clan or family and they do not fight directly, it is a form of a conflict. Yes, another point?

Learner: Better fishing areas.

Teacher: Yes they were fishermen because the Luo were good fishermen and they were looking for better areas.

Learner: Disease and other epidemics affecting livestock and people

Teacher: Yes, there was outbreak of diseases which affected the people and animals as well.

Learner: Need for adventure.

Teacher: Yes we also said that migration was not taking place within a week. It was a long period exercise, historically we cannot say they migrated en-masse like the way the Israelites moved out of Egypt. You remember that? When the Israelites moved out of Egypt led by Moses. They moved in one group after the Passover. One cannot say that it was something like that because they moved into small groups. Let us note that by the fifteenth century the Kenyan Luo began moving and settling into the present day Nyanza Province. It is worth noting that they started being noted in large numbers in Nyanza Province. They moved into four distinct waves. We are going to reflect on what we might have covered in class four or five, hope memory is still fresh ... in our minds. NY***?

NY: Joka-jok

Teacher: That is the first wave, the second wave, C******, yes tell us.

C******: Joka-owiny (learner has difficulty pronouncing the word).

Teacher: Pronounce it properly J**** pronounce it the way it is supposed to be

J****: Joka-owiny (She pronounces it properly).

Teacher: Yes let us move on to the third wave. Yes N**** at the corner?

N****: Joka-omolo

Teacher: Finally S*****, what was the last group?

S*****: I do not know.

145

(Laughter from the rest of the class).

Teacher: From M*** A**?

M*** A**: Luo Abasuba.

Teacher: Yes we have the Luo Abasuba. Those are the four distinct waves. Yes, what do you understand by a wave? It is a group who can be distinguished and related to somebody. What do you understand by the word Joka?

Learner: People of.

Teacher: ‘The people of’, that is very smart. Good I did not know you knew that. The term Joka means ‘the people of’, so when we say joka jok we mean the people of jok. .... For the next ten minutes we are going to make use of the textbook. Let us make use of the textbook from page fifty nine. We are going to have the class exercise. (Bell rings end of 1st lesson. The second lesson begins. 8.55-9.30 am.). (Learners are reading from their textbooks, the teacher is walking in class checking if the learners are actually doing the reading.)

Learner: Are we writing down?

Teacher: We shall have what we call random presentation from any one of you.

(Learners open their textbooks and read about the waves of the Kenyan Luo. The teacher moves around pinpointing what they have to do in ten minutes. Learners read work from the textbook and write down notes in their exercise books. After ten minutes, teacher asks them to prepare class presentation in connection with the four waves that is the joka-jok, joka-owiny, joka-omolo and Luo Abasuba. A critical moment in the lesson came after the presentations when the teacher asked:)

Teacher: .... By the way in what ways were cultures interacting before the coming of Europeans? They came into contact, in what ways did they interact? Does it mean that if they were Bantus they were living as Bantus alone, if they were Nilotes they were living on their own or did they interact? No they were coming into contact in one way or the other so which are these ways that the cultures were constantly coming into contact?

Learner: Through intermarriages.

Teacher: Yes, you do not just marry somebody when you do not come into contact with them. Another way? Yes N******?

N******: They were barter trading.

Teacher: Good, which other way?

Learner: during raiding.

146

Teacher: Yes, during raiding. Where do we hear of cattle rustling in Kenya?

Learner: North Eastern and Eastern provinces.

Teacher: Yes most of these communities believe they should have as much cattle as possible because cattle is a form of prestige; whenever they see an animal they believe it belongs to them. This is a problem which started long time ago and it is still here in the twenty first century. How can we solve this problem of cattle rustling? Very briefly, how can we solve it, yes J**?

J**: By giving or distributing animals to people.

Teacher: How else, what else can we do? ... So far we have looked and named intermarriages, trade, raid and what else? Yes? ..All those are the traditional ways, which were making people to interact. We now see the Bantus coming into contact with the Luos and they intermarried and this led to the group called Abasuba. Yes Abasuba and they settled around Lake Victoria. It seems now that most of the Luo people were moving along or around water. Water is life and the Luo people were so much affiliated to the water bodies simply because they were fishermen. Yes what else?

Learner: Some of them were pastoralist and were looking for water for their animals.

Teacher: Yes they were looking for water for their animals. So that was the livelihood of the majority of the Luo. So they settled in Rusinga Island, Mfungamano Island. Rusinga Island is very important to us Kenyans. What do you think is the reason?

Learner: It is an archeological site.

Teacher: Yes that is one reason, what else? W*****?

W*****: That is where Tom Mboya was born and buried.

Teacher: That is a very good historian, repeat for them (Learner repeats her answer).

Teacher: Clap for her (Learners clap for her). Who was Tom Mboya?

Learner: He was a freedom fighter.

Teacher: In one way or the other, yes he was a freedom fighter.

Learner: He fought for the right of workers.

Teacher: Good, clap for her. He was what we call the trade union leader, he fought for the right of workers.Who is currently the leader of trade union - COTU? Yes Angela?

Angela: Francis Atwoli (Learners clap).

Teacher: I keep on saying we cannot ignore current affairs programme and I think it’ s a high time we start what we can call a Current Affairs Club in the school (Bell rings).

147

Go to page forty-eight of the explorer-History and Government book one- and draw the map which traces the movement of the river-lake Nilotes. Apart from that I would like you to read about the effects of the Luo migration in Kenya over the weekend in preparation of the first test which might be done by the end of the week. (The teacher then leaves class).

According to Bhabha (1994) hybridity in identity results from an ability to transverse cultures and to translate, negotiate and mediate affinity and difference within a dynamic of exchange and inclusion. It thus involves the generation of new ways in which to understand and to generate possible new cultures through interaction wherein values and meaning that wouldnormally clash are negotiated and regenerated. It isforhis reason that teachers inthe lessonspresented here were trying to explain how the loss of cultural distinctivenesshadoccurred amongst the river-lakeNilotes. From the interactions it is clear that the transculture that they were trying to clarify did not havce to do with adding a culture to another but rather a change that entailed ethnic groupsthat cameinocontact with each other going beyond their particular cultures and and recognizing themelves in other cultures. For this reason for Gilroy (1993), Voss (2003) and Castells (1997) what really matters both theoretically and practically are the reasons why, how, by whom, and for what nationality is constructed. Stremlau (1998) argues that in Africa, such reasons involvethe development ofan identity, which has learnt, as Senghor would say, to “assimilate without being assimilated”. This is whatthe teaches were seemed to be striving for. Their lessons can therefore not be viewed as aimed at a homogenizationthat had to undermine cultural differences that wereethnically-bound. They discussionsthat occurred highlighted a co-existence amongst the ethnic groups.To make sense of it it wasimportant toexplain how the political and cultural boundaries were permeated, re-established, transcended and reinvented by social inteaction. As a consequence of separate ethnic cultures been surpassed through externally networking, the interconnected and entangled ways of living amongst the different ethnic groups had tobe reflected upon to explain how they entangled because migratory processes.

The main point that is central to the lessons was that it was difficult to draw boundaries that separate the Nilotes and other ethnic groups. In this regard, the concept of Kenyan nationhood had to be understood free from geopolitical concepts organized around the idea of ethnicity or tribes. It is related closely to historical developments that cannot be understood without considering changes that have occurred in time and space (cf. Bayart, 2005).

8.4 CONCLUSION

From the teachers’ classroom interactions it is evident that even though the ethnic groupings within Kenya, as Miller (2000) would argue, were seen as ethical entities that could be used as rationale

148 for a particular self-definition, learners had to be made aware that without an understanding of their origin and inter-connectedness it was impossible to have a full sense of what it meant to be either a Luo, a Maasai, or a Cushite. But, as demonstrated in this chapter, some teachers ended lessons with learners still holding onto the illusions they brought into school. Even though all of them indicated that these groups interacted and shared practices and beliefs, these teachers overlooked the syllabus requirements; that is, clarifying to the learners the implications of peoples’ interactions and being grouped as they were, and linking this to the concept of nationhood they were expected toembrace.

The reason the various ethnic groups who traced their origins from places outside the present Kenyan boundaries should be considered Kenyans was important in promoting a view of nationhood that transcended geo-political spaces. But some the teachers except for the Loreto schools restricted their curriculum practices to the given objectives or lesson plans that they so faithfully and uncritically relied on. Their teaching strategies could thus not encourage learners to develop understanding that highlighted how the historical content they associated with the different ethnic groups was institutionalized over time. The oversight resulted in learners continuing to identify with ethnic representations and positions seen as neither good nor bad, nor as important to their sense of being part of a particular community. To change it had to be clear to them how the present positions they were in and how they were situated in the society were the results of being socialized as members of particular groups into the taken-for-granted as worthwhile cultural representations and beliefs. This autobiographical process (Pinar, 1995) could not take place without an understanding of the historical process in which it was produced.

For effective teaching for the nationhood Kenya proposed, teachers needed to engage with their learners in ways that would have encouraged a process of self and other -knowledge. It was important for them to understand the generally transient and unstable nature of the representations associated with their different ethnic groupings that were dealt with in the lessons. Although appearing persistent and enduring, these representations could not be properly understood without stressing the commonality of descent or occupation of particular localities that characterized them. But, the teachers appeared to half-heartedly show commitment to make these aims of the policy for teaching History realizable. They seemed to touch at this point very late in the lessons rather than making it the central issue. Developing the understanding the syllabus proposed required, amongst other factors, enabling the learners to identify critical moments of separation between the various ethnic groups and understand further the commonality amongst them.

Failure to promote pedagogical relationships marked by dialogue, questioning, and communication (cf. Tosh, 1991; Jenkins, 1991; Husbands, 1996) and emphasize the interpretive dimensions of knowing, make teachers, in Greene’s (1978) words:

149

… avoid interrogation and critique. They transmit, often tacitly, benign or neutral versions of the social reality. They may deliberately or not adopt these to accommodate what they perceive to be the class origins or the capacities of their students, but whether they are moving those young people towards assembly lines or administrative offices, they are likely to present the world around as given, probably unchangeable and predefined (1978, p.56).

Therefore, rather than affirming difference that sustains self-representation through exclusions, teachers needed to demonstrate how the ethnic differences in Kenya collided, crossed over, mutated and transgressed during the times when ethnic groups were negotiating and struggling for cultural identities. Such an approach would have assisted the learners to clarify for themselves that the cultural differences they assumed amongst themselves were not to be understood as confined to geo-political spaces or a romanticized and essentialized sense of history and experience. Instead, teaching should have devoted adequate time, moved beyond simple understanding of the interconnectedness of what was spoken about, encouraged discussions that clarified the richness of the different ethnic representations and the value of what they had in common. Devoting inadequate time to such activities during lessons thus reflected how the teachers’ attitudes towards took the syllabus requirements and perhaps their curriculum literacy as both History specialists and teachers in general.

The next chapter looks in greater detail at these teachers’ dispositions. It draws on their views about the syllabus requirements and how they translated them into curriculum practices to argue for the importance of conceptions that emphasize the complex ways in which nationhood changes over time and, in particular, how Kenyan citizens as social actors within state played it out. The argument is that in a post-colonial East African country such as Kenya, teachers could not understand nationhood as limited to an identity. This disposition of a culturally-related malaise, demonstrated a state of consciousness rather than what they seemed to understand as an objective reality needing protection.

150

CHAPTER 9

TEACHERS’ VIEWS ON CLASSROOM PRACTICES: THEIR RELATIONSHIP TO PERSPECTIVES ON NATIONHOOD

9.1 INTRODUCTION

According to Giroux (1998), critical educators use teaching to construct meaning that alerts learners to ways in which their consciousness has been shaped. The process involves addressing the forces that have shaped consciousness and engaging in a reflective process that clarifies how learners’ identities involve a flow of intertwined forces from which they cannot completely disentangle themselves (see also Kincheloe, 1996). With such a process, both teachers and learners can begin to see themselves at various points in the web of reality, then understand and disengage themselves from the social, political and educational structures that shape their identities. They will be able to expose the cultural stories (the meta-narratives) that have grounded the ways in which they make sense of the world and gain the ability to see from a variety of perspectives. This will enable them perpetually to redefine themselves and their world as they encounter new experiences. As Hall (1991) points out:

The critical thing about identity is that it is partly the relationship between you and the other. Only when there is another can you know who you are … And there is no identity …without the dialogic relationship to the other. The other is not outside, but also inside the self, the identity. So identity is a process, identity is split. Identity is not a fixed point but an ambivalent point. Identity is also the relationship of the other to oneself (1991, pp.15-16).

However, when students are simply filled with pre-digested ‘facts’ about the society and unexamined social knowledge, as is evident in this study, this redefinition is impeded. A third space which enables self-conscious and reflective actions on cultural and political positions, as Bhabha(1994) has argued, required not merely to engage in acknowledgement politics, but also to devise teaching strategies that would have made clear the power, limits, partiality and indeterminacy of the concepts that have been used to reinforce the various ethnic or tribal sense of place and identity held by the learners.History teachers in Kenya were expected to recognize and respect their learners’ diverse and rich local discourses, cultural codes, meanings, artefacts and practices, assist them develop understandings that could facilitate cooperation amongst them, and enable them to transcend ethnic barriers by creating pedagogical conditions in which otherness was a resource for strengthening Kenyan nationhood and identity. Their teaching strategies had to help clarify the taken for granted as worthwhile historically and socially constructed strengths and limitations of inherited cultural views and ways of acting that learners were using to read meaning

151 into their world views and social relations. The perceived uniqueness of the different ethnic or tribal groups had to be engaged with in ways that clarified how they were related to particular historical developments. They were not to be affirmed to cause ethnic insularity. It was unsatisfactory simply to heed the institutionalized cultural representations of the learners without also paying attention to how they had changed over time. In short, teachers would be considered as having curriculum expertise if they could promote an understanding of the transculturality that had occurred between and amongst what were perceived as different cultural representations. However, the data presented below illustrates that they seemed unaware of the importance of this teaching approach. They simplified the historical accounts of the various ethnic groups, reducing them to a collection of what Boix-Mansilla (2000) would describe as “facile myths”.

Stremlau (1998) has suggested that for Africans, a sense of nationhood has to be continuously revitalized by what people do in their everyday lives. Therefore, in a context of being continuously questioned and unsettled by challenges of globalization, it was important to encourage the learners through teaching that promoted reciprocity and mutual acceptance, not only to be immersed into themselves but also to be assisted to open up themselves to other cultural representations. Kenyan identity had to emphasize the inter-relation and action that would bring about continuous enrichment whilst providing scope for internal diversity for every ethnic group within the country. Even though affirming mental representations and ethnic positions with which learners associated themselves, it was important that they be reflected upon and understood as part of a holistic Kenyan heritage. These were aspects that were actively learned, internalized and drawn on to name, marginalize, and define difference as the ‘Other’. Therefore, they had to be systematically analysed to identity how, as dominant cultures, they created boundaries that enforced exclusions. Even though the syllabus proposed this, as the data presented below illustrates, teachers struggled to express what it meant.

9.2 TEACHERS’ UNDERSTANDING OF THE SYLLABUS

Following a lesson on the Kenyan Luo, when the teacher was asked about her teaching methods she seemed to see the manner in which she dealt with the history of the Nilotes as unproblematic. Rather than use the subject content to explain how it was constructed as a historical narrative by offering a critical theoretical language for doing this and open up the possibility for learners to see inter-relationships between ethnic groups, she thought it adequate to simply repeat unquestioningly the content.

152

Teaching history as repetition of subject content

When the researcher asked “Why did you teach the way that you did?” teacher 1 responded as follows:

Teacher 1: I wanted the learners to understand more about the Nilotes. They are classified into four categories and it was not enough just to classify the Nilotes but I wanted specifically to go into more details and at this point I started with the River lake Nilotes. The learners need to know more about other societies or groups that are involved because we cannot deal with the history of the Kenyan Nilotes alone without discussing other communities outside Kenya. I had to tell them about other Nilotic speakers who are also found in Sudan, Uganda and Kenya. So generally after exposing them to different groups then I had to narrow it down to the topic of discussion, which was the Nilotic people of Kenya up to the twentieth century. From there I started talking about the Luo in particular and this is where I gave them examples of the Luos we have, the different sections of the Luo we have and where they settled. In order to achieve the objectives of the classification of Luos in Kenya in particular, I subdivided them into clans that is the Joka Jok, Joka Omolo, Joka Owiny and the Luo Abasuba. From there I had to have a class representative to encourage the learners to participate fully and know that history does not belong to the teacher but they can as well be part of it and be able to present it. In so doing I was trying to take the learners closer to the subject. I also like it because sometimes there is a problem with history because the teacher dominates the lesson with a lot of talk and assume that the learners know very little and so by doing this I was trying to make them be part of the process and still achieve my objective.

The teacher seemed not to appreciate the need to use content to redefine the complex, multiple, heterogeneous realities that currently constitute the Nilotes. She seemed to believe that it was unproblematic to encourage learners to speak about ethnic groups through the cultural and political codes that promoted their insularity. As Giroux (1992, p.33) suggests:

Students must be encouraged to cross ideological and political borders as a way of furthering the limits of their own understanding in a setting that is pedagogically safe and socially nurturing rather than authoritarian and infused with the suffocating smugness of a certain political correctness. More specifically, student experience has to be analysed as part of a broader democratic politics of voice and difference.

The teacher thus should have given more thought to how the different ethnic groups could be taught in ways that promoted Kenyan nationhood, yet this was not appreciated. In another instance, when the teacher from PGDSW1 School was asked why she introduced the topic about the Portuguese in the manner she did, her response was also as follows:

Teacher 5: We were looking at the Portuguese in the East African coast during the eighteenth century. This is important as it enables the learners to know and learn about other people and also

153 their cultures. The method I used was to enable the learners to internalize the concepts. For example, when I talked of the brutality of the Portuguese to the Africans I tried to relate this to a bully and this enables the learners to get a clear picture of what was taking place during this particular period. I also used the Atlas, in fact in all my lessons I always use the Atlas to enable the learners to get to know where specific regions that we are dealing with in the topic are situated. In this case we were not only looking at Portugal but also countries like Spain, France and also the East African coastal towns. By doing this, the learners are able to connect what is being said in class with reality. They are able to have a better understanding of places that are mentioned in class.

Another important thing is the lecture method that I use. In history this is important because you need to let the learners have the information that they need and it is mainly effective in other higher forms like Form Three and Four, but still in the lessons I tried to use the lecture method as it enables me to explain to the learners the issues covered in detail. The importance of this topic or of the lesson taught is that it enables learners to learn more about other people and try to understand how things were done long time ago.

It is clear that for this teacher as well, to know history implies content recognition (cf. Bernstein, 2000). For her it was important to understand what linked the Kenyan present to the Arab and Portuguese contexts. It was important for learners to have a sense of early colonial practices and how they may or may not have been affected by them. In the teacher’s view, speaking to important social, political, and cultural issues was crucial for learners to understand the ways they had been produced and constructed as members of the Kenyan society. Teachers 4 and 5 highlighted the reasons for using similar teaching approaches by saying, respectively:

Teacher 4: In the classes that I have, I notice we have a lot of students who are from the academies and the way they were taught was had a lot of spoon-feeding. So I take them gradually through the lessons. That is why I write sometimes fully but at other times I just put important things on the board. Sometimes I have to mention the whole factor and explain it and even put it on the board because we have those who are very poor and we also have those from the academies who are not used to being told to do things on their own. So that is one reason. Secondly, there is the problem of text books, we do not have enough so I cannot give them a lot of reading in class and tell them to prepare. Sometimes before the lesson like you I hope noticed, like these ones, I told them to prepare but to the others I gave an assignment to do. I know they can be able to do it now - from the few books that we have. So this is the way things are and why I was teaching the way I did. Most of the time I use a lot of lecture methods because of the nature of the students we have got. We have some very bright students and if you simply give the notes they get bored. Some if you lecture continuously without building up the notes on the blackboard they get lost because they were not used to that method but when you get to Form Three and Four, especially Form Four,

154 there will be a lot of lecture method, less writing and a lot of work on their own because they are now used to that.

He continued:

Teacher 4: we should involve the students more. After giving learners work to do like the one I gave the learners to research on the political organization of their communities, I hope to be able to discuss with the learners to make them compare and contrast a lot with others. This is a very important method - that way the learners are able to learn and also discover new things from their own communities. Teachers must try to bring reality into their teaching and not to be so theoretical [she pauses] - like the use of atlases in history is important so that these students know the areas you are talking about. There is danger, for example, if you are talking about/discussing even a topic such as nationalism, these children have a tendency of transferring facts. I always call it wholesale, they transfer facts from Kenya to another country, like when you ask about the factors that led to nationalism in Ghana, they would say the Kipande system, land alienation. They are talking about the Imperial British Company just like that [laughs] so it is because they cannot conceptualize Ghana as a country – it’s all Africa [more laughter]. To know the region and where it is located is important. Another thing I noticed we are from various communities, you cannot rule out the problem of mother tongue in our teaching and our students, the majority of whom are from towns. As I told you, they came from academies so the way they were taught might be very different. If you are going to continue to use the lecture method they might miss a lot because you are going to pronounce a certain word differently and they will keep thinking yes what did she mean and that is, let us [teachers] know ourselves, like me I know I have a problem with my ‘S’, so that is why I have to use chalk and board. I cannot continuously just talk or say let us discuss, no.... sometimes the key facts I must write on the board. It is important to build your lesson on the board so that you know that they have understood and at the end give them a bit of time to ask and clarify certain issues.

The point was emphasized by Teacher 5:

You have to lecture, at least that is the method I use. There are many methods, when I introduce a topic I always use a lecture method, but normally before the lesson I normally tell the students to go through the topic first because if you are teaching learners what they do not know, what is new is very difficult when you teach them new content. You give the students the areas where they are supposed to read ahead of you so that when you lecture they take notes. I also dictate and as I identify a new point we deal with it as per the notes. When they do the work, they do it at the back of their books then when I come to class we do it at the front. If students have questions especially outside the topic being discussed, they write this down at the back of their books, but mostly I lecture. There is also a lot of student interaction. You know when they have done it, that is, read

155 the topic before hand; they already know what you are talking about. For example in ‘The People of Kenya’ I introduced the topic, of course I just have to identify the groups that is the Bantu, Nilotes and Cushites, so I introduce the topic, I give them the objectives as they are written in the syllabus - by the end of the topic, in fact I tell each student to write. I should be able to do the following: I give them the objectives first, then when I give them the work, they are already aware of the objectives and what they have to achieve by the end of the topic. So when I start teaching as the lesson progresses we confirm with a tick what objectives we have achieved. I ask the students if we have covered each and every objective that we stated and we move on. That is what I do. For example, we define the Bantus - why do we call them Bantus, how do we identify them? I may draw a diagram showing how the Bantus are having the various tribes, various communities, the Nilotes the same and the Cushites the same. On the migrations I had also to draw a diagram showing the migration routes. When I drew the diagrams when I was discussing the Bantus I had to write the area from which they originated. The Bantu in the Congo Basin, the Nilotes came from Ethiopian Highlands and the Cushites also I indicate where they came from, so that when you look at the maps students have an idea of where they are coming from and through where of course we also have to look at why the migrated. In fact the reasons are almost the same and I make them know that they are almost the same but they have to be very careful. When we are talking about the Nilotes, they may have moved as they tried to, you know you even talk about the Luo as they followed the Nile, they were looking for water for fishing and on the other part the Bantus because they were basically farmers they were looking for land for greener pastures for their animals. Even when you talk about the way they were attacked by external enemies, because of this you talk of them moving because of external pressures. Then you ask: who were these people? You will realize that these students do not even know who these people are, they can talk about two unrelated communities, like they can talk of the Luo and the Miji Kenda so you have to make them know where each community descended from otherwise they keep on contradicting the facts.

Teachers were aware of the different methods they could use but felt that in their circumstances it was important first to promote clarity about historical detail. They knew that it was inadequate for learners to just know about the past and when events happened. They had to be able to explain why they happened and that the differences they took for granted as unproblematic were not simply marking political and cultural lineage but were also products of struggles for justice and a democratic society. However, the significance hereof seemed underplayed by the teachers. Teacher 8’s view exemplified this when she said:

Teacher 8: I like the presentations, the topic we are doing now is the ‘Emergence of Kenyan Societies’ so we are really dealing with many societies at a go, like today we deal with the Nilotes, we have also dealt with the Bantu, and among the Bantu we have looked at the Luhyias, the Kikuyu etcetera and they are so many. I prefer to let the students participate because there is a lot

156 of repetition and usually I see that when they do it themselves, they seem to understand it better, they capture it faster and even they retain it better than when they or rather I just use the lecture method. You see it involves political organization of each ethnic community, economic and social, so when they present the different groups the girls …, they are the ones who are very interested and they volunteer. I usually do not force them. What happens is that I give the topic and when one is from that community they always volunteer or are eager to present. Like the Nandi girl. Over some years, the Kikuyus we have had in school are always from the rural areas. Sometimes they feel so inferior so when you see them coming out to say I would like to present my ethnic community then you know that their esteem is high and that is why I encourage it. I also want them to be proud of their heritage. You also find that when they do the presentation, the way they pronounce the names helps other learners to remember something about it. That is basically why I use presentation. But it may be different in various classes, like when you saw me teaching about the Mji Kenda because I felt that the learners - well I know the girls, you know you compare and contrast like the class I have just come from - they are active, they put up their hands and they want to participate. Unlike that other class when I give them topics for presentation they do not bring it out well. So I do prefer to lecture them first and then later it is after learning that I would give them maybe thirty minutes to discuss in groups so that they are able to remember. As I told you, there is a lot of repetition so after learning I always follow it up with some kind of discussion.

Researcher: How is that done? The discussions?

Teacher 8: I divide them into groups of six each in class, and then they discuss what I have already taught so they go through it again. I find that this works better. At the end of the day when you give them a question on what they have discussed, they are able to answer it well, meaning that the method helps them to understand better unlike when I just use the lecture method or presentation separately.

Of course we have other methods that I use even though I did not use them in these lessons. We sometimes dramatize. After these topics we are going to dramatize the functions of the council of elders, the economic activities, finally they are going to dramatize that.

Researcher: How do students do that?

Teacher 8: We go out in the field and they shall have already practiced. I give them about two weeks to prepare and when we go out to the field and they have time to dramatize… I think dramatization in history is very important. However, we do not have time for that all the time, actually very limited time if we really have to complete the syllabus. You see the syllabus is very wide and then what has happened is that it is wide and a bit shallow. Otherwise they do not get time to do a particular thing and really get to understand it properly. We do a bit of this and a bit of

157 that yah, so it is wide and we do not really have enough time otherwise I would have liked to dramatize every topic.

This teacher understands that sources do not recapture a past situation in its entirety. She appreciates that the sense of historical context depends also on imaginative flair, which can be demonstrated when dramatizing historical events. His view supports that of scholars such as Tosh (1991), Jenkins (1991), Collingwood (1993) and Appleby et al. (1995), who argued that understanding is dependent on individual insight and experience. He saw his learners as being in this position. They, therefore, needed to have the opportunity to demonstrate their understanding of subject content in ways that reflected their taken-for- granted cultural representations and, subsequently, ways in which they were individually positioned. Only Teachers 2, 7 and 10, respectively, seemed to appreciate that promoting unity was more important than mastery of what was peculiar to different ethnic groups. The views are examined below.

9.3 THE IMPORTANCE OF UNDERTANDING THE POLITICAL UNITY THAT CHARACTERIZES ETHNIC DIFFERENCE

Someof the whoparticipatedin the study were ofthe view that opening up and freely discussing what distinguished the different ethnic communities would help learners see the world through different lenses. Understanding the sources of the differences amongst ethnic cultures, nations and economies had to raise awareness of the interdependence that characterized such differences. Here are examples:

Teacher 2: It is important that teachers try to inculcate that concept of nationality into the learners. In history there are lots and lots of avenues for this. Every topic is an eye-opener. Early industrialization for example, what does it tell Kenyans? In as much as we are not yet industrialized but in the process the problems that we face are not only unique to us but even those countries that have been highly industrialized were faced with the same problems during their initial stages. We should enable learners to understand the various limitations we have as a country. We need to be aware that these are not problems unique to our country but are and were experienced in many other countries in the world. Even with these limitations we are and should still be able to develop. However, the idea of tribalism is there. Students still view or see themselves as belonging to a particular tribe, especially after the referendum. The kind of politics that exists in the country also encourages learners to think along tribal lines. Of course as a teacher you need to expose the learners to the limitations of this. You need to focus on unity. Remember we talk of unity in diversity. Yes learners need to see that in as much as they belong to a specific tribe, they cannot stand isolated. Remember we also say ‘divided we fall but united we stand’. We need each other as Kenyans regardless of our tribal affiliations.

158

Teacher 7 had this to say as well:

Yes that means appreciating yourself and at the same time you have a duty as a patriot, as a Kenyan. Yes I think history does that. Basically, how the syllabus is organized brings out all that. Like now we are doing ‘The Emergence of the Kenyan Societies’, first of all we do the migration for them to know who they are and, even as they settle in the urban area , they should know and appreciate where they came from and how they lived before. I have seen this - the way they appreciate understanding their origins. And then the topic with the topic ‘Integration of Kenyan People’, when we come to that, we really learn that we must appreciate one another as Kenyans. Despite the fact that you are a Kikuyu, a Kalenjin, a Luo, we are all Kenyans. So we do learn about the factors that bring us together. What unites us - in our class or school we can see that we have girls from different communities, Luos, Kikuyus, Kalenjin, Maasais but we must learn to understand and appreciate each other regardless of our differences and see ourselves as Kenyans. History as a subject really brings that out because by the end of the day you would have appreciated yourself as a Kikuyu and then as a Kenyan and an African.

Teacher 10 simply stated:

… it looks at our government and the Constitution … and helps learners to understand our system of government. When we talk about the struggle for independence, nationalism, all this makes the learners aware of the process of Kenyanization, how we came to be. Remember we trace our origin from ‘early man’ and by the time we get to government practices, it opens the students’ eyes and assists them to know themselves and their country better. It is this understanding that will make them patriotic. A topic like ‘Early Trade up to the Modern Types’ introduces learners to cultures and practices outside their own. A topic like urbanization enables the learners to know about other urban areas, e.g., London, Johannesburg, and what they learn enables them to understand other people too. We also talk about different systems of government like those of India and Britain and they can compare these to our own creating awareness of the different politics.

Underplaying the importance of a critical stance towards subject content on the part of the other teachers posed serious professional capacity challenges to teach and fulfill the syllabus requirements.

The data presented below provides a clearer nature of these challenges. It illustrates not only how teachers understood ways in which their learners viewed their cultural and national identities but also misconceptions of the requirements of the syllabus of which they themselves were victims.

159

9.4 TEACHERS’ MISCONCEPTIONS OF THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE SYLLABUS

When asked how their classroom practices enabled them to nurture a Kenyan sense of identity that the syllabus is promoting, I received the following responses:

Teacher 5: I put them as per their tribes. If one is a Kikuyu he is made to discuss either the political, economic or social structures of the Kikuyu, and especially if they are going for half-term I do tell them to even make a dictionary. So, for example, if you are Luo you should be able to tell the others what certain words mean. For example, what is Ja? What is Piny, Jaduong? I involve them by giving them work to get information from home and whatever source they can use or come across.

Teacher 10 said:

Teacher 10: You find that most of them, especially in Nairobi, do not know who they are; some of them can’t even give you an example from their communities so you find that when you teach them there is a lot of interest. For example, if you are talking about the Nilotes, when you get to the Luos, you will find that the Luos in class would really become interested, they would want to know more about that; so I have realized that learners would like to know more and history helps them to achieve this.

This view was also shared by Teacher 6 and Teacher 8, both from PGBS1 school:

Teacher 6: Yes, I can say that they now appreciate who they are. Like you know the Luo girls [the teacher is referring to the girls who presented the topic – Luo in class], they could really pronounce the words properly, like the way she said “Gem”, they want to show the others that they are Luos, they know who they are. You also saw the Kikuyus; they were able to even say the words in Kikuyu and this gives me the feeling that they do appreciate who they are. You saw the Masai girls; the fact that they put up their hands to identify with their community and talk about what distinguishes them from others in the class is pleasing. Now I need to teach them that for example, me that am a Kalenjin and I still talk positively about the Nandi is not a sign that I do not appreciate who I am, which is a really good thing to learn.

Teacher 8: Yes, first I really have to encourage them so that they can develop interest in their various communities. You see the problem we have, we have town-dwellers, most learners come from the urban areas and they are removed from the rural environment. When the lesson started they did not like to mention where they come from and it is like they even do not know about it. So when they were going for their mid-term I told them to go and learn about their roots, to know something, to ask their parents and even to travel to the rural areas. I tell them to speak to the old people in their community. I did this even before we started on the topic. The girls were actually

160 interested in their communities and not the boys, especially when born and brought up here in Nairobi. I have to encourage them to come out openly and say what community they come from and to be proud of who they are. Previously, I would say that they were not really willing to come up and identify with a given community, but now they seem to like it and they want to be associated with their communities, which I think is a good thing.

The responses indicate that teachers viewed learners primarily as members of ethnic groups. This seemed to be common to many of them. For example, the teachers’ views outlined below reflect a narrow understanding of culture in which affinity is defined on the basis of an association that is focused on ethnicity:

Teacher 2: No I don’t think the young ones are patriotic enough or that they value their country as such. They are influenced by the media and believe that only foreign things are good enough. For example, I don’t think my girls would put on a dress worn by their tribe in public instead of a modern hipster look. They do not associate their tribes with anything good or classy. We as teachers need to reverse this and encourage them to embrace things belonging to their tribes. For me that is the beginning of pride in being Kenyan.

Some teachers were fully aware that History should not only enable learners to know who they are in terms of their ethnic descent but it should also create awareness amongst them of how they form or are part of a wider Kenyan community. For example, Teacher 1 said:

Teacher 1: There is one general objective and this is to enhance the national unity. So to classify the learners in terms of their tribes will be a problem in a cosmopolitan city like Nairobi. If you are in a rural area it is much easier because often people would speak the same local language that belongs to their community or tribe. But take, for example, a school like this one; you can get a student by the name Joy Opiyo. But Joy Opiyo comes from a family where it is only the father called Opiyo and the mother might be from a different tribe altogether so the learner doesn’t know more about her ethnic background. It becomes difficult and most learners are in this position. They do not know anything about their own community. For example, when I give learners work to go and get information about their communities, the information I got or what I said or they did was not fruitful, it turned out to be negative and I realized that this kind of method cannot work here in Nairobi. Now I’m trying to enhance what we call ‘the nationhood’, what we call Kenya by concentrating on things Kenyan in my lessons. The students have found themselves in a country called Kenya yet they do not even see the importance. For example, just ask the people to sing the national anthem or to respect the nation’s flag when it is being raised. These ones will just talk, or do what they want. Things have really been diluted in this country, politically we are diluted, economically we are diluted and socially, that is, the worst part of it because the parents themselves do not care about the tribe or nation. It is all about an individual and himself alone. The

161 issue of viewing the nation as a wider family is no longer there; everybody takes care of himself or herself as a member of a tribe.

To clarify this issue further, Teacher 1 explained why learners should be encouraged to understand the concept of nationhood:

Teacher 1: We find that history is really trying to expose to the learners that there are very many societies in Kenya. I would also like to say as a history teacher that these societies are not static and people keep on moving and mixing with others therefore this idea of saying that we are specifically forty-two tribes, in fact, we are almost double now because the moment we have intermarriages, a different society comes up so this idea of saying that we are forty-two tribes may have been there before independence. It was a colonial set-up where they divided Kenyans along tribal lines in order to make them not to mix up and have common agenda on how to remove the colonizers. So with that kind of orientation we still have the notion that certain areas belong to certain communities and, with this in mind, as a historian, I can see that there is a danger because the moment I say that central province belongs to the Kikuyus that would be wrong, because when you go there you will find some Kambas, Luos etcetera. And this Kamba who lives in central province has married a Kikuyu. The kids come to a school like this one [he points at a girl walking past], what is she? That is the problem, so what we can do is to sensitize our learners, let them know that they are Kenyans. The moment I start getting information from the learner, let’s say I’m discussing the Bantu and I tell a student you are a Bantu tell us all about the Bantu, the other students will just look at her, tell us about the Kikuyu. Now Muthoni is in Nairobi, they are urbanized; she has never gone to the rural area. The father is an accountant in Nairobi and the mother a teacher. She was born and grew up in Nairobi. Even to speak the Kikuyu language is a problem. Then you ask another student the same scenario will arise - follow. Also for us to eradicate this problem of tribalism it is only us who can fight and stop tribalism in this country. The moment we stop going to the root of somebody that will end tribalism. And for me as a Kenyan the learner gets to know that in a country called Kenya we have several societies which make the nation. So we have the Bantu and we divide them into communities. Although we are saying that during their migration some of them went and settled in western Kenya, or eastern, all the same, be it the Nilotes or the Cushites, all these people settled and formed a society called Kenya. And it is this kind of initiation that can help the learners. In fact even the books should be changed so that we talk of a society called Kenya but made up of other societies that form Kenya. We can call them the nuclear societies that make up a larger society called Kenya and we shall be proud of it. That is why you realize that I cannot make that mistake of saying that so-and-so is from such-and-such a tribe that one is very dangerous. What about the Somalis because they are very few? You see now and that will create a lot of problems.

162

According to Hoffman (1996 and 1998) a concept of culture that is derived from cultural artifacts of a people presupposes an otherness that is essentialist rather than universalist in its treatment of culture. However, an inability to grasp this aspect on the part of teachers seemed to be responsible for what appeared to be a lack of enthusiasm to grasp the complexity behind ethnic plurality that makes the Kenyan society. Symbolic differences were spoken about as if they reflected differences in culture. This conflation resulted into teaching strategies that underplayed the importance of the broad values that formed the middle ground that lies amongst the different ethnic cultural representations. Confusing the material and non-material state of ethnicity when dealing with national matters could thus not promote keenness amongst the learners for a deeper grasp of the complexity in the 'cultural self and other'. Instead, it encouraged an understanding of nationhood that obscured meanings behind ethnic categories and the broader contexts of meanings and values in which they exist; what Hoffman refers to as the “overarching frameworks of shared values or a worldview firmly enshrined in a privileged space called culture” (p.550).

Since the culture of Kenya cannot be other than one of post-colonialism, affirming and developing it further required an acknowledgement of the mutability of cultural representations within it and sensitivity to the convergence of the significant different ethnic ways of life and aspirations. However, teachers seemed unaware of this. From PGBS1 School, Teacher 4’s responses further clarified this lack of awareness, as follows:

Teacher 4: We need to let learners know that we are living in a society and our resources are almost scarce or limited and the government is trying to bring us together, that is why we are talking about people living in harmony. Like in Form One the topics I have given One G, I gave them a topic to go and do the political organization of their people. I’m very sure they will come up with the same that there were a council of elders to sort out issues but after that we shall discuss it, we normally get our own time like on Fridays after clubs and then we discuss. So we have to be open and see if you are to look at communities and say you do not like them because this community is doing this then even in this school we cannot live in harmony. I first of all ask them how many communities we have in class and they look around and realize yes; by the way some of them were even realizing for the first time that you mean this girl is from such a community. Like there is one girl in 1P who is a Luyhia yet they had assumed that she was a Luo, why? Because she speaks both. The girl says her mother is a Luo and the father is a Luyhia, now intermarriages - what is she? She can feature in both, she speaks both languages and she is a very good girl. They realized that there is even one Somali. They did not know that her origin was Somali because she speaks Kikuyu. So with such an example they are able to interrelate, they come to learn and know. When you get to Form Three and we say the government is working towards unity…, the Constitution, education system, all these factors enable learners to understand then we can also

163 look at the challenges and the problems that may arise, like tribalism, nepotism, religious prejudice. All this enable learners to understand and appreciate issues.

Teacher 6 as indicated below shared the above view:

The topic covers interaction with other communities and the learners come to realize that there is a lot of interaction through marriages like between the Kikuyus and the Maasai. They really appreciate it and in fact that it involved so many communities and this made them to realize that they were not just isolated tribes, there was a lot of intermarriages and this enables them to know and understand that it is good to interact. For a long time people interacted [smiles] so what would make them different to stop them from interacting with people from other tribes? I realize that this topic not only focuses on tribal communities in Kenya but it even unites them, brings them together, they understand. What I liked most was that they were able to understand what other communities did and after learning such a topic one realizes that there is no much difference. If you look at the political organization they are the same, the social and economic. There was also a lot of borrowing, communities borrowed from each other. But the teacher must develop this. The girls come from different communities and different parts of Kenya but here, when they meet, they meet and live as Kenyans and not as people from specific areas or communities. I use the classroom situation and tell them to look at each one other and they see that they come from various communities but when they get to class this makes no difference, they become the same. So I try and make sure that they understand one another and appreciate one another. And sometimes I say to them, “well I’d like to see people interacting”. I do not like to see the same group walking together from class to the fields, to the dormitories and they really laughed about it. The girls have really changed, in fact the topic on Kenyan people, the fact that it is teaching about intermarriages, interactions even makes them to see and realize that as a community we are not different from the others and this creates a sense of togetherness. They are able to appreciate even how and why others live the way they do. So I think this is very helpful because the concept of interaction really brings students together.

However, for Teacher 11:

The students have been spoilt from home where they have been made to know that they are Kikuyus or Kambas or Luos. So that is why when we look at the reason why we study history, we want to create and promote national unity. And that is the reason why we have the topic ‘National Integration’, where we look at some of the factors that we should emphasize so that we can forget about our tribes. We also look at factors that hinder national integration and national unity in a country and one thing that we talk about is tribalism as one of the factors. Because it is actually one of the major things that have made Kenyans not to be united, to view themselves not as Kenyans but as belonging to a particular tribe.

164

This pedagogical approach focusedon political unity was likely, according tothis teacher, to give students the opportunity not simply to discover their hidden histories but also to recover them. This means retrieving the stories of the history of their ethnicity through a critical analysis that helped them understand differences between their taken-for-granted concepts of what they were and what is reality and thus nurturing a consciousness which Ladson-Billings (1995) argue is necessary for an enriched understanding of a culture. Such understanding would promote engagement with the immediate realities of those taught without limiting itself to such realities. In the words of Geertz (1973, p.17) it will involve "gaining access to the conceptual world in which subjects live so that we can, in some extended sense of the term converse with them”. This is an education environment in which interaction will go beyond cultural representations or symbols and in which teachers will try to connect with all learners and develop a community wherein both they and learners would be learning from one another. Hall (1991) and Giroux (1999) suggest too that such learning cannot be limited to self-reflection but should open up lived experiences to critical scrutiny, to expose how they have been constituted in different historical and social formations.

Teachers whose views are outlined above understood this clearly, yet they did not translate these views into practice in their lessons. Consequently, drawing on Thompson (1990) and Jenks (1995), it is reasonable to argue that even though they were aware that learners seemed to understand the value of highlighting cultural hybridity (Homi Bhabha, 1994), in practice, the moments of historical transformation that learners had experienced were not considered seriously. As a result, a way of gaining a wider picture of the social process in which they were woven could not be made clear as invaluable for building a sense of nationhood based on understanding how their many voices and perspectives created a worthwhile common world (cf. Young, 1995).

9.5 CONCLUSION

The evidence presented in the chapter illustrates the degree towhich teacherts consideredit important toencourage the learners to reflect upon taken-for-granted conceptions of their identities, extend and deepen them in ways that took into account the interdependence that Held et al. (2000) argue is important for prosperity in globalization. The importance of critical reflection is clearly identified as necessary to develop an understanding of what is essential to the nationhood that the teaching of the History and Government syllabus has to help attain. It stipulates the competences of a Kenyan nationhood. Therefore, the seeming lack of a clear understanding of these curriculum competences by the teachers whoparticipatedinths study is worrying. Drawing on Laclau and Mouffe (1985), it is thus reasonable to conclude that they will be able to meet the requirements of the syllabus in practice if they go much further than merely recognizing what is common amongst the ethnic groups. They need to enable learners to understand what underpins their commom- sensical views about the different ethnic groups within their country. As Gramsci (1971) advises, it

165 is only through classroom discourse that engages these views that learners will experience the ways in which they are positioned within the social structures and the merits and demerits thereof. This is what is necessary for the effective teaching of the History and Government syllabus.

166

CHAPTER 10

SUMMARY OF RESEARCH FINDINGS, MAIN CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS

10.1 SUMMARY OF RESEARCH FINDINGS

The study has looked at how nine History secondary school teachers implemented the objectives of the History and Government syllabus. In particular, it focused on how they were able or unable to translate the objectives to nurture nationhood within their country. An expectation of the syllabus was that this sense of being Kenyan would be nurtured by the teachers. However, the evidence as exemplified by the content and methods of their teaching indicates that they lacked the conceptual understanding and, subsequently, professional knowledge of and skills to translate national policy into practice. They had a limited understanding of the concept of nationhood/national unity as well as of the policy requirements in developing this among learners in schools. As such they lack ‘curriculum understanding’.The curriculum content and teaching strategies they used were aimed primarily at promoting the learners’ familiarity with what was taken for granted as the varied cultural beliefs, artefacts and practices of the 42 tribes considered to be part of the Kenyan society. Teachers seemed unaware that they needed to interpret syllabus aims, infer concepts from them and then decide on appropriate teaching and teaching strategies that could help them meet the requirements of these officially predetermined aims. Nor were learners’ responses to given tasks used as a resource to encourage them to think more deeply and critically about why they provided such responses. A critical stance was not used as a means to attend to individual learners’ commonsensical understanding of what they associated with their own and different ethnic or tribal groups. Teachers made no effort to identify the misconceptions that led to such understanding. Even were there was awareness of the need to go beyond this understanding and promote a broader Kenyan sense of being, they still provided a descriptive rather than conceptual interpretation as a response to the objectives of the History and Government syllabus. In short, teachers failed to grasp the political significance (Giroux 2000) of what they were expected to teach.

The stance that teachers adopted towards the syllabus, generally, made them view its objectives literally. They did not reflect on them in order to highlight their underlying principles and what it took to translate effectively such principles into teaching content and activities in their lessons. The lack of a critical stance towards these objectives made working with the syllabus unsatisfactory. From the evidence, it is clear that its conceptual implications for practice were misunderstood and could not be grasped without a deliberate and focussed intervention process by policy mediators.

167

The evidence in this study thus highlights the challenges of an inappropriate understanding of the concept of culture by the teachers. This, in the view of Pinar et al. (1995), requires a change of socialization, as it is not only a process that requires an ability to use procedures promoted by policy, but is one that should enable an understanding of how those procedures can facilitate learners’ cognitive development and, in turn, teachers’ reflective abilities and teaching strategy adaptation. For this study, the view implied that it was only when the teachers understood how the objectives of the syllabus needed to be translated into lessons that they could fulfil their role. However, they were uncritical in their wok and made no effort, in general, to reflect on these objectives or, in particular, the political aspirations of the country as a basis from which to determine the suitability to their interpretations and lessons. A more detailed account of these findings is provided in this chapter.

Chapter 8 indicates how teachers did not consider it important to look critically at the objectives of the syllabus to identify their conceptual implications and how to translate them into lessons that would help facilitate meeting their requirements. They unquestioningly used them in their lessons and seemed unaware that they were expected to analyse them. Without such consciousness, they saw no need for the professional agency they needed to exercise (Giroux, 1998). As a result, lessons, as illustrated in the chapter, could serve as means to inform and contribute to the fulfilment of Kenya’s national unity. They understood their role in a very restricted way. The objectives of the syllabus were used simply to ensure that learners could recognize taken-for- granted traits of the various ethnic or tribal groups within their country. Familiarity with these traits and proud association with one’s own ethnic traits were used as an indicator of successful teaching, with teachers mistaking recognition for a realisation of identity (Stremlau, 1998).

There was an assumption from policymakers that teachers knew what to do, however, evidence collected from their lessons indicated that they needed professional help in this regard. They had no grasp of the concept of national unity underpinning the syllabus, nor had they been socialized to think and behave in ways relevant to its expectations. They functioned on the basis of routine and common sense, unaware that their strategies were bound to what Bernstein (1990) calls ‘recognition rules’. Informed by this evidence, the argument in this chapter is that without such awareness, the ideals of Kenya will continue to pose challenges to the teachers’ levels of curriculum literacy.

Chapter 9 provides evidence to illustrate the teachers’ perspectives of the syllabus requirements as an indication of the level of their curriculum literacy. From the accounts they gave of the objectives of the syllabus, it was possible to conclude that they did not realise that they were expected to analyse these objectives and identify what was required to further the learners’ cognitive development before planning and teaching lessons. The literal reading of the objectives prevented them from using them to identify a concept on the basis of which lessons for facilitating

168 national unity could be planned and presented. Consequently, failure to analyse in this manner hindered the historical approach and curriculum design for which the syllabus was intended, and highlighted the teachers’ shortcomings in their levels of curriculum literacy. An in-depth analysis of the nature of these shortcomings highlights certain misconceptions. These contributed to a lack of understanding of the reflective processes that the concept of national unity or nationhood that needed to be taught implied to the ways they had to teach and deal with learners’ responses. The chapter concludes by emphasising the need for engagement within lessons that can promote the reflective process required by the syllabus objectives.

10.2 THE SIGNIFICANCE OF THE MODELS USED IN CONDUCTING THE STUDY

It could have been possible to try and understand teachers’ understanding and translation into lessons of the objectives of the History and Government syllabus only in terms of, for example, Goodson’s (1994) suggestion that using History to nurture nationhood in the classroom should be looked at in relation to its context. He considers conceptions of nationhood as related to power relations that regulate and determine how, as agents, teachers work with concepts of nationhood promoted within their countries. However, even though this view was important in understanding why Kenyan teachers taught as they did, following it slavishly would have narrowed the focus of the study and essentialized the impact of structural factors on teachers’ interpretation of the objectives of the syllabus. It could have resulted in overlooking what, for example, Stremlau (1998) considers to be the complexity that characterizes notions of nationhood within Africa in general, namely, continuous enrichment and reshaping without being assimilated. His and other authors’ views that have influenced the design of this study helped me to capture the shortcomings in the teachers’ concepts and lessons.

Through Stremlau’s theory on the impact of globalization on notions of nationhood within Africa, teachers’ understandings of the objectives of the History and Government syllabus and lessons could be read as a reflection of the nature and scope of their curriculum expertise or literacy. As a conceptual lens, the theory provided a broad perspective for the investigation that occurred, and encouraged flexibility in examining the complex factors that informed their interpretation of the requirements of the syllabus and design of their lessons. The latter could not be explained as only influenced by taken-for-granted views about the ethnic groups within the society. How they understood nationhood in relation to these ethnic groups generated the basis on which they designed and presented lessons. For tribes as a cultural groups that needed to be treated equally (cf. Laclau & Mouffe, 1985), and which possessed resources that had to be mediated to nurture democratically national unity in Kenya, teachers need concepts and knowledge to enable speaking and nurturing nationhood across these tribal or ethnic differences.

169

Laclau and Mouffe’s (1985) views on the importance of negotiating difference if democracy based on a shared hegemony is to be created, facilitated an understanding of teachers’ interpretation of the objectives of the syllabus. How they taught was understood as a product of descriptive accounts informed by a commonsensical view of the symbols and practices of each ethnic group. On the basis of Gramsci’s (1971) view about what shapes experience, it was possible to draw the conclusion that their analyses were context and structurally bound. In short, Gramsci argues that the acquisition of experience is largely informed by the context and structures to which people are exposed. The factors are both constraining and enabling - the latter depending greatly on people’s agency. Drawing on these views thus made it reasonable to consider the teachers’ understanding of the syllabus and how they translated its objectives into lessons as originating from a commonsensical view of ethnicity or tribal representations. Observing them in classrooms allowed for a systematic recording of their practice. Later, during the interviews, I was able to understand these practices from their perspective and see how they were informed by a structurally and geo- politically bound notion of ethnicity and nationhood. Teachers who were barely aware of the conceptual complexity they had to draw on assumed that affirming and reinforcing allegiance to ethnicity was fulfilling the requirements of History and Government.

With the help of Giroux, Kincheloe and Laclau and Mouffe’ ideas I was able to argue that they needed to have exposed learners to a collaborative process aimed at developing the concepts required by History and Government through democratic engagement that bestowed ethnic hegemony equitably amongst learners. This was achieved by exposing and challenging the power relations associated with how the groups were distinguished. Looking critically at the nature of interaction processes that they encouraged during lessons lent unwavering support to these authors’ views that democratic deliberation is a prerequisite for democratic cooperation and co-existence. The lack of critical engagement with the History and Government objectives on the part of the teachers, and emphasis on differences and commonalities amongst the ethnic groups, compromised conceptions that could have enhanced the learners’ understanding of the requirements of national unity or nationhood within Kenya.

The findings in the study provide confirmation of, amongst other arguments, Pinar et al.’s (1995) concept of curriculum understanding. They highlight that the effective implementation of any curriculum programme requires a mindset that provides the possibility of generating different interpretations and views of a situation which impact on a plan of action. Such planning should ask questions of feasibility, instead of prioritising commonsensical understanding. In the case of this study, drawing on the concept made it reasonable to conclude that teachers were unable to reflect and display critical understanding of, first, the History and Government syllabus, second, what was important when having to translate it into lessons and, third, an appreciation of the implied

170 concepts and principles that they needed for designing meaningful lessons that could fulfil the recommendations of the Koech commission.

The conceptual complexity provided by the theories used to anchor the design of the study have proven valuable. Someone might wish to know whether or not any other theories or design would have privileged the study to better and more interesting data on the teachers’ understanding of national unity as a concept, and how it was used to organize history knowledge aimed at its development. I, however, have my doubts because no literature and research approaches used for this study were dependent solely upon collecting, reading and interpreting data. Throughout the study, as researcher, I remained open to new or unexpected ideas and occurrences as they emerged in the field and adapted the conceptual focus and data-collecting strategies and analysis accordingly. How the study was designed and carried out, as outlined in detail in chapter 7, testifies to this.

10.3 LIMITATIONS OF THE STUDY

The study as a whole highlights challenges of conducting research for an academic qualification. When involved in a study for this purpose, the researcher is faced with time and financial constraints that set limits on what he or she could do before entering the field, in the field and afterwards. In a period of three years, the first year was mainly spent refining a proposal and doing preliminary reading around the problem. Even though new literature was discovered daily, there was a point at which I had to move in the interest of time. The second was used for fieldwork. Even though conceptions about nationhood and national unity had become controversial within Kenya because of violence that erupted after the 2007 presidential elections, field-work could not be extended to the third year because by that time, as a student, I was expected to be rounding-off writing the thesis. As an international student in my university, I could not consult with the research population when the analysis was finalized, so as to verify my interpretation, because they were all in Kenya. I had to rely on other forms of communicating with the teachers and ensure that the data does not catch someone else’s attention and compromise the anonymity teachers were promised. A possibility was emailing sections of the report to a few selected participants but, since many of the teachers had no access to such technology, I refrained from doing so because they could not ascertain that no one else would have access to the findings if sent to computers they did not own. Because of these constraints, the trustworthiness of the data had to be established by relying primarily on the multiple methods I employed.

171

10.4 CONCLUDING REMARKS

The findings of the study indicate that unless History teachers develop the requisite curriculum literacy, it will be difficult for them to implement the recommendations of the Koech commission. Not taking their role seriously enough as policy analysts will continue to affect adversely the curriculum choices they made. The lack of knowledge about, in general, curriculum design approaches and, in particular, historical methods, is responsible for the commonsensical stance they adopted towards the syllabus. Failure to develop such professional capacity will continue to make it difficult for them to engage with the syllabus in ways that demonstrate ‘curriculum understanding’.

It is clear from the evidence in the study that to achieve the objectives of the History and Government syllabus effectively, the concepts and principles that underlie them have to be properly understood. There was lack of awareness that the objectives were misconceived. This is worrying if it is assumed that the teachers have the necessary professional competences and thus need no in-service professional support that can teach them about curriculum as research (Stenhouse, 1975), and emphasize the importance of critical reflection on their taken-for-granted concepts of ethnic and national symbols, artefacts and practices within Kenya. Without these competences, teachers’ professional and intellectual responsibilities as required by the History and Government syllabus will continue to be compromised. The challenge for the Kenyan education system is how to restructure the current professional socialization processes for teachers and introduce teacher education programmes that expose them to processes that enable practices informed by a complex notion of national unity or nationhood. Teachers need to acquire both skills and theoretical capacities to interpret the syllabus and devise teaching strategies that effectively deal with their conceptual implications. They should be helped to understand the History curriculum design approach that is essential to promote the envisaged national unity. They have to understand the hybrid nature of this unity for them to foster effective learning. This is impossible without professional capacity-building programmes. Providing a detailed syllabus is meaningless if it is not understood. Based on the findings, several implications for teachers, policy makers and teacher educators emerge. They are discussed below.

10.5 IMPLICATIONS

To develop the appropriate content knowledge, theoretical and philosophical understanding required to accept and translate the national policy into appropriate classroom practice, appropriate professional development (for inservice teachers) and teacher education (for preservice teachers, policy mediators in Kenya have to clarify the theory of content that underpins the History and Government syllabus. The data collected in this study demonstrates clearly that teachers need

172 clarity in this regard. It is only when they themselves have acquired this conceptual clarity that they can design effective lessons. It is invaluable to the learning that has to be promoted.

The study further recommends that, in helping teachers, the idea of teachers as researchers be encouraged to create an intelligent profession that can transform classroom practice and begin the process of developing the kind of citizens Kenya aspires to have. Research will enable them to question and develop understanding and professional skills that are needed to teach in ways that broaden understanding of what it means to be Kenyan.

The study also indicated that classroom teaching in Kenya secondary schools is a lonely endeavour. There is no evidence that teachers shared or talked to each other about the History and Government syllabus requirements. They need to be encouraged to build structures that facilitate collaborative professional learning within their schools. Promoting such collegiality could help in providing a support structure to improve classroom performance and thus respond to the requirements of the syllabus. As Tschannen-Moran (1998) asserts, when teachers have group discussions as professionals they provide each other with information on teaching, assessment and give each other advice on strategies that could be used in the classroom. As each one of them reports on how he or she works in the classroom, the others give professional feedback that helps a great deal in confirming whether one is still on the right track. Staff collaboration is a way of increasing efficacy amongst teachers. It is in such collaboration groups that teachers can also devise ways to cater for lack of resources, while still achieving what they wish to in their classrooms. One should be aware that teachers could effectively plan their work more effectively when they understand what is supposed to be the purpose of their teaching and what it takes to translate it into practice effectively. Problems of uncertainty that emanate from not being confident about responsibilities evident in the study could be reduced and they could confidently begin to become part of the discussions in the bodies that are in charge of the school curriculum within the country.

Curriculum planners should not only speak to each other but should also involve the teachers for whom they stipulate what to teach. Currently, teachers are the practitioners, left out and not contributing to the planning. A tradition of curriculum debates and critique has to be established within the teaching profession in Kenya. Involving teachers in the planning could prove useful to develop their understanding of what is expected of them. Their knowledge-for-practice (Cochran- Smith & Lytle, 1990) may prove invaluable in pointing to the real issues that need attention when having to teach History and Government. Being part of the planning would also ensure that they extend their curriculum literacy. Of course, this will require political will if it is to be done meaningfully.

173

SELECTED REFERENCES

Books

Aldrich, R. & Gordon, P. (1997). Biographical Dictionary of North American and European Educationists. London: Woburn Press.

Anderson, B.R. (1983). Imagined Communities: Reflections on the Origin and Spread of Nationalism, London: Verso.

Anderson, B.R. (1991). Imagined Communities: Reflections on the Origin and Spread of Nationalism, London: Verso Editions.

Appadurai, A. (1995). Modernity at Large. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.

Appiah, K.A. (1992). In My Father’s House: African in the Philosophy of Culture. New York: Oxford University Press.

Appleby, J., Hunt, L. & Jacobs, M. (1995). Telling the Truth about History. New York: Norton.

Auerbach, C.F. & Silverstein, L.B. (2003). Qualitative Data: An introduction to coding and analysis. New York: New York University Press.

Axford, B. & Huggins, R. (1999). Towards a Post-National Polity: The Emergence of the Network Society in Europe. Oxford: Blackwell.

Bakhtin, M. (1981). The Dialogic Imagination: Four Essays. (ed.) M. Holquist (Trans) C. Emerson and M. Holquist. Austin and London: University of Texas Press.

Ball, S. (1994). Education Reform: A Critical and Post Structural Approach. Buckingham, England: Open University Press.

Bam, J. & Visser, P. (1996). A New History for a New South Africa. Pretoria: Kagiso.

Barber, B. (1984). Strong Democracy: Participatory Politics for New Age. Berkeley, California: University of California Press.

Bayart, J. (2005). The Illusion of Cultural Identity. London: C. Hurst & Co.

Beck, U. (1994). Risk Society: Towards a New Modernity. London: Sage.

Beck, U. (2003). What is Globalization? Cambridge, UK: Polity Press, Malden, MA: Blackwell.

Becker, H. & Geer, B. (1970) Participant Observation and Interviewing: A comparison in Qualitative Methodology. In, W.J. Filstead (ed.). Qualitative Methodology: firsthand involvement with the social world. Chicago, IL: Markham Publishing

174

Bell, J. (1993). Doing Your Research Project: A Guide for First Time Researchers in Education and Social Science. Buckingham: Open University Press.

Benhabib, S. (1996). Democracy and Difference: Contesting the Boundaries of the Political. Princeton: Princeton University Press.

Berger, C. (1986). The Writing of Canadian History: Aspects of English-Canadian Historical Writing since 1900. Second Edition Toronto, ON: University of Toronto Press.

Berger, P. & Luckman, T. (1976). The Social Construction of Knowledge. Harmondsworth: Penguin.

Bernstein, B. (1975). Class, Codes and Control. London: Routledge & Paul.

Bernstein, B. (1990). Class, Codes and Control, Vol. 4: The Restructuring of Pedagogic Discourse. London: Routledge.

Bernstein, B. (1996). Pedagogy, Symbolic Control and Identity: Theory, Research, Critique. London: Taylor and Francis.

Bhabha, H.K. (1994). “The Other Question: Stereotype discrimination and the discourse of curriculum”. In, The Location of Culture. London: Routledge.

Billig, M. (1995). Banal Nationalism. London: Sage.

Bilmes, J. (1986). Discourse and Behaviour. London: Plenum Press.

Blunkett, D. (1998). Taking Forward Our Plans To Raise Standards For All. Sudbury: Department of Education and Employment.

Bogdan, R.C & Biklen, S.K. (1982). Qualitative Research for Education: An Introduction to Theory and Methods. United States of America: Allyn and Bacon.

Boix-Mansilla, V. (2000). “Historical understanding: Beyond the past and into the present”. In, P.N. Stearns, P. Seixas, and S. Wineburg, Knowing, Teaching and Learning History: National and International Perspectives. New York: New York University.

Booth, M. (1993). “History Curriculum”. In, J. M. Reiss and A.S. King (1993). The Multicultural Dimension of the National Curriculum. London: The Falmer Press.

Brewer, J. & Hunter, A. (1989). Multi Method Research: A synthesis of styles. New bay Park CA: Siege.

Britzman, D. (1994). “Is there a Problem with Knowing Thyself?” In T. Shanahan (ed.), Teachers Thinking, Teachers Knowing (pp. 53–75). Urbana, IL: National Conference on Research in English.

Bruner, J. (1960). The Process of Education. Cambridge: Harvard University Press. 175

Burman, E. & Parker, I. (1993). Discourse Analytic Research. London: Routledge.

Button, G. (1991). Ethnomethodology and the Human Sciences. Cambridge, Cambridgeshire: Cambridge University Press.

Carr, E.H. (1990). What is History? Harmondsworth: Penguin.

Carr, W & Hartnett, A. (1996). Education and the Struggle for Democracy. The Politics of Educational Ideas. Buckingham: Open University Press.

Carter, K. & Doyle, W. (1987). “Teachers’ Knowledge Structure and Comprehension Process”. In, J. Calderhead (ed.) Exploring Teachers’ Thinking. London: Cassell (pp. 147-160).

Castells, M. (1997). The Power of Identity. Malden, Mass: Blackwell.

Cohen, J. (1996). Democracy and Difference: Contesting the Boundaries of the Political. Princeton: Princeton University Press.

Cohen, J. & Arato, A. (1992). Civil Society and Political Theory. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

Cohen, J. & Manion, L. (1984). “Action Research”. In J. Bell, T. Bush, A. Fox, J. Goodey and S. Goulding (1984) (eds.). Conducting Small Scale Investigations in Educational Management. London, Harper and Row and the Open University

Collingwood, R.G. (1993). The Idea of History. Revised Edition. Oxford: Clarendon Press.

Counts G. (1932/1996). Dare the School Build a New Social Order? New York: John Day.

Crick, B. (1998). Education for Citizenship and the teaching of Democracy in Schools: Final report of the Advisory Group on Citizenship. London: Qualifications and Curriculum Authority.

Cvetkovich, A. & Kellner, D. (1997). Articulating the Global and the Local: Globalization and Cultural Studies. Boulder, Colorado: Westview Press.

Davis, B., Sumara, D. & Luce-Kapler, R. (2000) Engaging minds: Learning and Teaching in a Complex world. London: Lawrence Erlbaum.

Dryzek, J.S. (2000). Deliberative Democracy and Beyond. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Du Gay, P. (1996). Consumption and Identity at Work. London, Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Dunn, Ross E. (2000). (ed.) The New World History. Boston: Bedford/St Martins.

Durkheim, E. (1956). Education and Sociology. London: Routledge.

Enslin, P. (1993). “The Place of National Identity in the Aims of Education”. In, R Marples (ed) 1999, The Aims of Education, London: Routledge.

176

Fairclough, N. & Wodak, R. (1997). “Critical Discourse Analysis”. In T van Dijk (ed.). Discourse Studies: A Multidisciplinary Introduction: Vol 2. Discourse as Social Interaction. London: Sage.

Faulks, K. (2000). Citizenship. London: Routledge.

Feagin, J. Orum, A & Sjorberg. (1991). (eds.). A Case for Case Study. Chapel Hill, NC: University of North Carolina Press.

Featherstone, M. (1995). Undoing Culture. London: Sage.

Fetterman, D. (1989). Ethnography: Step by Step. London, Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.

Flick, U. (1998). An Introduction to Qualitative Research. London: Sage.

Foucault, M. (1977). Discipline and Punish: The Birth of the Prison. London: Penguin.

Foucault, M. (1981). Ideology and Consciousness. New York: Prentice Hall.

Foucault, M. (1989). The archaeology of Knowledge. London: Routledge.

Franco, J. (1989). “The Nation as Imagined Community”. In H. Aram Visser, The New Historicism. London and New York: Routledge.

Fraser, W. & Perry, T. (1993): Reconstructing Schools as Multiracial/Multiculural Democracies: Towards a Theoretical perspective. In Fraser, W. & Perry, T. (1993) [eds.]: Freedom’s Plow: teaching in the Multicultural Classroom. New York: Routledge.

Gall, P.J., Gall, M.P. & Borg, W.R. (1999). Applying Educational Research: A Practical

Guide. USA: Longman.

Geertz, C. (1973). The Interpretation of Cultures: Selected Essays. New York: Basil Books.

Gellner, E. (1983). Nations and Nationalism. Oxford: Basil Blackwell.

Giddens, A. (1990). The Consequences of Modernity. Palo Alto, California: Stanford University Press.

Gilroy, P. (1993). Modernity and Double Consciousness. Cambridge, Massachusetts: Harvard University Press.

Gilroy, P. (2000). Against Race, Imagining Political Culture Beyond the Color Line. Cambridge, Massachusetts: Harvard University Press.

Gilroy, P. (2005). Post colonial Melancholia. New York: Columbia University Press

Giroux, H.A. (1992). Border Crossings. New York: Routledge.

177

Giroux, H.A. (1996). Counter narratives: Cultural Studies and Critical Pedagogies in Postmodern Spaces. New York: Routledge

Giroux, H.A. (1997). Pedagogy and the Politics of Hope: Theory, Culture and Schooling. Boulder, Colorado: Westview Press.

Giroux, H.A. (1998). Channel Surfing: Racism, the Media, and the Destruction of Today's Youth. New York: St. Martin's Press

Giroux, H.A. (1999). “Border Youth, Difference, and Postmodern Education”. In, M. Castells, R. Flecha, P., Freire, D., Macedo and P. Willis: Critical Education in the New Information Age. New York: Routledge.

Giroux, H.A. (2000). Impure Acts: The Practical Politics of Cultural Studies. New York: Routledge.

Giroux, H.A. & McLaren, P. (1989). Critical Pedagogy, the State, and Cultural Struggle. Albany: State University of New York Press.

Gitlin, A. (1994). (ed.). Power and Method: Political Activism and Educational Research. London: Routledge.

Gitlin, A. & Russell, R. (1990). “Alternative Methodologies and the Research Context”. In, A. Gitlin, (ed.). Power and Method: Political Activism and Educational Research. London: Routledge.

Gitlin, A. & Russell, R. (1994). “Alternative Methodologies and the Research Context”. In: Gitlin A (ed.). Power and Method: Political Activism and Educational Research. London: Routledge.

Goodenough, W.H. (1957). “Cultural Anthropology and Linguistics”. In,

R. Wardhaugh, (1986). An Introduction to Sociolinguistics. Oxford: Basil Blackwell Publishing.

Goodson, I. (1993). “Nations at Risk and National Curriculum: Ideology and Identity”. In, N. Taylor (ed.) Inventing Knowledge: Contests in Curriculum Construction. Cape Town: Maskew Miller Longman.

Goodson, I. (1994). Studying Curriculum: Cases and Methods. Buckingham: Open University Press.

Goodson, I. (1998). Subject Knowledge: Readings for the Study of School Subjects. London: Falmer Press.

Gough, N. (2002). “Thinking/Acting Locally/Globally in Environmental Education: Implications for Internationalizing Curriculum Inquiry”. In, W Pinar (2003), International Handbook of Curriculum Research. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum Associates.

178

Gould, C. (1990). Rethinking Democracy: Freedom and Social Co-operation in Politics, Economy and Society. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Goulding, C. (2002). Grounded Theory: A Practical Guide for Management, Business and Market Researchers. London: Sage.

Gramsci, A. (1971). Selection from the Prison Notebooks of Antonio Gramsci. Edited and translated by Q.Hoare and G. Nowell, London: Lawrence and Wishart.

Gutmann, A. (1987). Democratic Education. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.

Gutmann, A. & Thompson, D. (1996). Democracy and Disagreement. Cambridge, Mass.: Belknap Press of Harvard University Press.

Habermas, J. (1981). The Theory of Communicative Action. London: Beacon Press.

Habermas, J. (1987). The Philosophical Discourse of Modernity: Twelve Lectures; Translated by F. Lawrence, Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

Hall, S. (1991). ‘‘The Local and the Global: Globalization and Ethnicity’. In, A. King (ed.) (1991), Culture, Globalization and the World System. London: Macmillan, pp. 19–40.

Hall, S. (1992). Formations of Modernity. Cambridge: Polity Press in association with the Open University.

Hall, S. (1996). ‘When Was The Post-Colonial?’ In, L. Curti and I. Chambers, The Post Colonial Question (ed). London and New York: Routledge.

Hall, S. (1996). Stuart Hall: Critical Dialogues in Cultural Studies. D. Morley and K. S. Chen (eds.), London: Routledge.

Hannerz, U. (1990). “Cosmopolitans and Locals in a World Culture”. In M. Featherstone (ed.) Global Culture: Nationalisation, Globalization and Modernity. London: Sage.

Happold, F.C. (1928). The Approach to History. London: Christopher, HMSO.

Hargreaves A. (1995). Changing Teachers, Changing Times. London: Cassell.

Harrison, A.G. & Knight, B.A. (2003). “The Challenge: Education for the Future”. In Research Perspectives on Education for the Future, A. G. Harrison and B. A. Knight, (eds.), Flaxton: Post Pressed.

Held, D. (1987). Models of Democracy. Cambridge: Polity Press.

Held, D., McGrew, A., Goldblatt, D & Perraton, J. (2000). Global Transformations: Politics, Economics and Culture. Cambridge: Polity Press.

Himmelfarb, G. (1987). The New History and the Old. Cambridge, Mass.: Belknap Press of

179

Harvard University Press.

Himmelfarb, G. (1991) Poverty and Compassion: The Moral Imagination of the Late Victorians. New York: Vintage Books

Hirst, P.H. (1974). Knowledge and the Curriculum. A Collection of Philosophical Papers. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul.

Hobsbawn, E.J. (1990). Nations and Nationalism since 1780: Programme, Myth, Reality. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Hobsbawn, E.J. (1995). Nations and Nationalism since 1780: Programme, Myth, and Reality. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Hoffman, J. (2004). Citizenship Beyond the State. London: Sage.

Howkins, A. (1989). “Green Sleeves and the Idea of National Music”. In, Raphael Samuel (Ed) Patriotism, The Making and Unmaking of British National Identity. Volume 3. National Fiction. London: Routledge.

Husbands, C.R. (1996). What is History Teaching?: Language, Ideas and Meaning in Learning about the Past. Buckingham, England: Open University Press.

Jenks, C. (1995). Culture–Key Ideas, London: Routledge.

Jenks, C. (1995). (ed.). Visual Culture. London: Routledge.

Jenkins, K. (1991). Re-Thinking History. London: Routledge.

Kelly, A.V. (2004). The Curriculum: Theory and Practice. 5th Edition. London: Sage.

Kincheloe, J. L. (1993). Towards a critical politics of teacher thinking: Mapping the postmodern. Westford, CT: Bergin and Garvey.

Kincheloe, J. L. (1993). The politics of race, history and curriculum. In, L. Castnell and W. Pinar (eds.). Understanding curriculum as racial texts: representations of identity and difference in education, p. 249-262. Albany, New York: State University of New York Press.

Kincheloe, J. L. (2004). Critical Pedagogy. New York: Peter Lang.

Kros, C. & Vadi, I. (1993). Towards a New History Curriculum Reform or Reconceptualization? In, N. Taylor (ed.) Inventing Knowledge: Contests in Curriculum Construction. Cape Town: Maskew Miller Longman.

Laclau, E. (1990). New Reflections on the Revolution of Our Time. London: Verso.

Laclau, E. & Mouffe, C. (1985). Hegemony and Socialist Strategy: Towards a Radical Democratic Politics. Verso: New York.

180

Laclau, E. & Mouffe, C. (2001), Hegemony and Socialist Strategy, Second Edition, London: Verso.

Le Compte, M.D. & Preissle, J. (1993). Ethnography and Qualitative Design in Educational Research. Second Edition. Academic Press. New York.

Lee, P.J. (1991). “Historical knowledge and the National Curriculum”. In R. Aldrich (ed), History in the National Curriculum. London: Kogan Page.

Lee, P.J. (1992).” History in Schools: Aims, purposes and approaches”. In, P. Lee, J. Slater, P. Walsh & J. White. The aims of School History: The National School Curriculum and Beyond. London: Kogan Page.

Lincoln, Y. & Guba, G. 2002. Establishing Trustworthiness. In A. Bryman and R. Burgess (Eds.), Qualitative Research. London: Sage.

Locke, K.D. (2001). Grounded Theory in Management Research. London: Sage.

Lofland, J. & Lofland, L.H. (1984). Analyzing Social Settings: A Guide to Qualitative Observation and Analysis. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth Publishing Company.

Lomas, T. (1993). Teaching and Assessing Historical Understanding. London: Historical Association.

Makgoba, M.W. (1999). African Renaissance. Majube Publishing (Proprietary) Limited. Cape Town. South Africa.

Mamardashvili, M. (1992): How I Understand Philosophy. Moscow: Progress.

Marion, L. & Cohen, L. (1994). Research Methods in Education. Fourth Edition. London: New York Routledge.

Marshal, C & Rossman, G.B. (1989). Designing Qualitative Research. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.

Mathews, J., Moodley, K., Rheeder, W. & Wilkinson, M. (1992). Discovering History: A Pupil- Centered Approach to History Method. Cape Town: Maskew Miller.

Maxwell, J. (1996). Handbook of Applied Social Research Methods. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Mazrui, A. & Tidy, M. (1984). Nationalism and New States in Africa: From about 1935 to the Present. London: Heinemann.

Medley, R. & White, C. (1991). “Assessing the National Curriculum: Lessons from Assessing History.”. In Bourdillon, H. (ed.) (1994). Teaching History, London, Routledge.

Merriam, S. (1998). Qualitative Research and Case Study Applications in Education. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. 181

Merriam, S. (2002). Qualitative Research in Practice: Examples for Discussion and Analysis. San Francisco, California: Jossey-Bass.

Mertens, D.M. (1998). Research Methods in Education and Psychology: Intergating diversity with qualitative and qualitative approaches. London: Sage.

Meyer, C. (1987). Teaching Students to Think Critically. London: Jossey – Bass Publishers.

Miller, D. (2000). Citizenship and National Identity. Cambridge, UK: Polity Press; Malden, MA, USA: Blackwell.

Miles, M.B. & Huberman, A.M. (1994).Qualitative Data Analysis. 2nd edition.Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Morley, D, & Robins, K. (1995). Spaces of Identity: Global Media, Electronic Landscapes and Cultural Boundaries. Abingdon: Routledge.

Mouffe, C. (1985). Hegemony and Socialist Strategy: Towards a Radical Democratic Politics. London, New York: Verso.

Mouffe, C. (ed.) (1992) Dimensions of Radical Democracy. London: Verso.

Mouffe, C. (1993). The Return of the Political. London: Verso.

Mouffe, C. (2000). The Democratic Paradox. London, New York: Verso.

Mouffe, C. (2005). On the Political. Abingdon, New York: Routledge.

Nash, G.B., Crabtree, A. & Dunn R.E. (2000). History on Trial: Culture Wars and the Teaching of the Past. New York: Random House.

Nietzsche, F. (1989). On the Genealogy of Morals (GM). Trans. Walter Kaufmann and R. J. Hollingdale. New York: Vintage, 1989.

Ntuli, P. (2002). “Indigenous Knowledge Systems and the African Renaissance”. In, C. A. O. Hoppers (2002), Indigenous Knowledge and the Integration of Knowledge System: Towards a Philosophy of Articulation. Claremont , South Africa: New African Books (Pty) Ltd.

Ogot, B.A & Ochieng, W.R. (1995). Decolonization and Independence in Kenya 1940-1993. London: James Currey.

O’Leary, C.E. (1999).To Die For: The Paradox of American Patriotism. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.

Osborne, K. (2006). Teaching Canadian History in Schools. Toronto: The Historica Foundation. Pankhania, J. (1994). Liberating the National History Curriculum. London: The Falmer Press.

182

Parekh, B. (2000). Rethinking Multiculturalism: Cultural Diversity and Political Theory. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

Patton, M.Q. (1996). Utilization-Focused Evaluation: the new century text. California: Thousand Oaks, Sage.

Patton, M.Q. (2000). Qualitative Research and Evaluation Methods. Thousand Oaks, California: Sage.

Patton, M.Q. (2002). Qualitative Evaluation and Evaluation Methods. (3rd Edition). Thousand Oaks: Sage.

Peters, R.S. (1979). Democratic Values and Educational Aims. Teachers’ College Record: Cambridge University Press.

Philips, N. & Hardy, C. (2002). Discourse Analysis: Investigating Process of Social Construction. Thousand Oaks, California: Sage.

Pinar, W.F. (1994). Autobiography, Politics and Sexuality: Essays in Curriculum Theory, 1972- 1992. New York: Peter Lang.

Pinar, W.F. (2004). What is Curriculum Theory? Mahwah: Lawrence Erlbaum.

Pinar, W. F., Reynolds, W. M., Slattery, P. & Taubman, P. (1995). Understanding Curriculum. New York: Peter Lang.

Rawls, J. (1996). Political Liberalism: The John Dewey Essays in Philosophy, 4. New York: Columbia University Press.

Rizvi, F. & Lingard, B. (2000). Globalisation and the Fear of Homogenisation in Education. In S. J. Ball (ed.), Sociology of Education: Major Themes. London: Routledge/Falmer.

Robertson, R. (1992). Globalization: Social Theory and Global Culture. London, Sage.

Robertson, R. (1999). Globalization: Social Theory and Global Culture. London, Sage. (Portuguese translation, expanded version).

Rubin, R. & Rubin, A. (1993). Communication Research: Strategies and Sources. Belmont, California: Wadsworth.

Rutherford, J. (1990). The Third Space: Interview with Homi Bhaba. In, J. Rutherford, Identity, Community, Culture, Difference. London: Lawrence Wishart, pp. 207-221.

Schmitt, C. (1996). The Concept of the Political. George D. Schwab (trans.). Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1996; Expanded edition 2006, with an Introduction by Tracy B. Strong). Original publication: 1927, 2nd edn. 1932.

Scholes, R. (1985). Textual Power. New Haven: Yale University Press. 183

Scotton, C.M. (1978). “Learning Lingua France and Socioeconomic Integration: Evidence From Africa”. In, Cooper, R. (ed) Language Spread Diffusion and Social Change. Bloomington: Indiana University Press.

Seixas, P. (2000). “Schweigan! Die Kinder! Or, Does Postmodern History Have a Place in Schools?” In, P. N. Stearns, P. Seixas and S. Wineburg (eds.), Knowing, Teaching and Learning History: National and International Perspectives. New York: New York University.

Senghor, L.S. (1979). Address delivered at inaugural session of African Charter. In, F. Ouguergouz (2003), The African Charter of Human and People’s Rights: A Comprehensive Agenda for Human Dignity and Sustainable Democracy in Africa. The Hague: Kluwer.

Schubert, W.H. (1986). Curriculum: Perspective, Paradigm and Possibility. New York: Macmillan

Stavrianos, L.S. (1996). Lifelines from the Past: A New World History. (1989 revised 1997). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.

Slattery, P. (1995). Curriculum Development in the Postmodern Era. New York; Garland.

Smith, J. (1992). Interpretive Inquiry: A Practical and Moral Activity. Theory into Practice, 31, (2), 100-106.

Stanley, T. (2000). Why I Killed Canadian History: Towards an anti-racist history of Canada. Social History, 33, (65), 79-103.

Stenhouse, L. (1975). An Introduction to Research and Development. London: Heinemann.

Strauss, A. & Corbin, J. (1998). Basics of Qualitative Research Techniques and Procedures for Developing Grounded Theory. (2nd edition). London: Sage.

Stremlau, J. (1998). People in Peril: Human rights, humanitarian action, and preventing deadly conflict. Washington, DC: Carnegie Commission on preventing deadly conflict.

Stow, W. & Haydn, T. (2000). “Issues in the teaching of chronology”. In, Arthur, J and Philips, R. (2004). (eds.). Issues in History Teaching. Routledge Falmer, Taylor and Francis Group, London and New York. (pp. 88-91).

Tamir, Y. (1993). Liberal Nationalism. Princeton: N.J, Princeton University Press.

Taylor, N. (1993). Inventing Knowledge: Contests in Curriculum Construction. Cape Town: Maskew Miller Longman.

Teijlingen, E.R. & Hundley, V. (2001). The Importance of Pilot Studies. Social research update, 35, 1-7.

Thompson, J.B. (1975). Studies in the Theory of Ideology. Cambridge: Polity Press.

184

Thompson, J.B. (1990). The Concept of Culture, Ideology and Modern Culture. Cambridge: Polity Press.

Tomlinson, J. (1999). Globalisation and Culture. Oxford: Blackwell.

Torney-Purta, J., Schwille, J. & Amades, J.A. (1999). (eds.). Civic Education across Countries: Twenty-four Case Studies from the Civic Education Project. Amsterdam: Eburon Publishers for the International Association for the Evaluation of Educational Achievement (IEA).

Tosh, J. (1991). The Pursuit of History. Aims, methods and new directions in the study of modern history. Second Edition. Longman Inc., New York.

Tosh, J. (2000). The Pursuit of History. Aims, methods and new directions in the study of modern history. London; New York: Longman.

Trend, D. (1996). Radical Democracy: Identity, Citizenship and the State.xxx

Tully, J. (2001). Introduction. In A-G. Cagnon and J. Tully (eds), Multinational Democracies. Cambridge; Cambridge University Press.

Van Dijk, T.A. (1997). (ed.), Discourse studies: A Multidisciplinary Introduction. Volume 2: Discourse as Social Interaction (pp. 144-180). London: Sage.

Vansina, J. (1987). Art History in Africa: an introduction to method. London: Longman.

Visram Rozina (1994) “British History: Whose History? Black Perspectives on British History.” In, Hilary Bourdillon (ed.), Teaching History, pp. 53-61. London: Open University Press, 1994.

Vithal, R. & Jansen, J. (1997). Designing Your First Research Proposal. Cape Town. Juta.

Voss, K.C. (2003). Transculture: The Emergent Property of Intercultural Encounters. Paper presented at the INST (Research Institute for Austrian and International Literature Wallerstein, I. (1991). 1991: Unthinking Social Science: The Limits of Nineteenth Century Paradigms. Cambridge: Polity.

Wardhaugh, R. (1986). An Introduction to Sociolinguistics. Oxford: B, Blackwell.

Weber, M. (1948). The Theory of Social and Economic Organization. (edited by T. Parsons). New York: The Free Press.

Weeks, J. (1990). Identity: Community, Culture and Difference. London: Oxford University Press.

Welsch, W. (1999). Transculturality: The Puzzling Form of Cultures Today. In, M. Featherstone, and S. Lash, (eds.), Spaces of Culture. City-Nation-World. London: Sage.

West, C. & Fenstermaker, S. (1995). Doing Difference. Gender Society, 9, (1), 8-37.

Wineburg, S. (2001). How Students Learn: History, Mathematics, and Science in Classroom. In,

185

P.N. Stearns, P. Seixas and S. Wineburg. Knowing, Teaching and Learning History: National and International Perspectives. New York: New York University.

Wodak, R. (1996). Disorders of Discourse. London: Longman.

Wolcott, H. (1988). Ethnographic Research in Education. In, R. M. Jaeger (ed.), Complementary Methods for Research in Education (pp. 185-249). Washington, DC: American Educational Research Association.

Wood, D. (1992). “Teaching Talk”. In, K. Norman (ed.), Thinking Voices: The Work of the National Oracy Project, pp. 203-2140. London: Hodder & Stoughton for the National Curriculum Council.

World Education Forum, Regional Framework for Action for Sub-Saharan Africa. 6-10 December 1999.

Yin, R.K. (1994). Case Study Research: Design and Methods. Thousand Oaks: Sage.

Young, I.M. (1990). Justice and the Politics of Difference. Princeton: Princeton University Press.

Young, I.M. (1995). Chapter 6 reprinted in John Arthur and Amy Shapiro, Campus Wars: Multiculturalism and the Politics of Difference, Westview Press, 1995.

Young, I.M. (1996). Communication and the Other: Beyond Deliberative Democracy. In, S. Benhabib (ed). Democracy and Difference. Princeton: Princeton University Press.

Young, I.M. (1997). “Difference as a Resource for Democratic Communication”. In. J. Bohman and W. Rehg (eds.), Deliberative Democracy: Essays on Reason and Politics. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

Young, I.M. (1998). Justice and the Politics of Difference. Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press.

Young, I.M. (2000). Inclusion and Democracy. Oxford; New York: Oxford University Press.

Journal and Other Articles

Abt-Perkins, D. & Gomez, M.L. (1993). A Good Place to Begin: Examining our personal perspectives. Language Arts, 70,(3), 193-204.

Ahonen, S. (2001). Politics of Identity through History Curriculum: Narratives of the Past for Social Exclusion-or Inclusion? Journal of Curriculum Studies, 33,(2), 179-194.

Appiah, K.A. (2001). Liberalism, Individuality and Identity. Critical Inquiry, 27,(2), 305-332.

186

Beck, U. Giddens, A. & Lash, S. (2003). Reflexive Modernization. Journal of Theory, Culture and Society, 20,(2), 1-33.

Carson, T. (2005). Beyond Instrumentalism: The Significance of Teacher Identity in Educational Change. Journal of Canadian Association for Curriculum Studies. 3,(2), 1-8.

Childs, J. (1935) "Should the School Seek Actively to Reconstruct Society?" Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 182,(1), 8-9.

Cochran-Smith, M. & Lytle, S. L. (1990). Teacher Research and Research in Teaching: The issues that divide. Educational Researcher, 19,(2), 2-11.

Cook, R. (2000). Identities are not like Hats. Canadian Historical Review, 81,(2), 261–265.

Dolby, N. (2000). The Shifting Ground of Race: The role of taste in youth’s production of identities. Race, Ethnicity and Education, 3,(1), 7-23.

Enslin, P. (1999). Education for a Liberal Democracy: Universalizing a Western Construct. Journal of Philosophy of Education, 33,(2), 175-186.

Enslin, P., Pendlebury, S. & Tjiattas, M. (2001). Deliberative Democracy, Diversity and the Challenges of Citizenship Education. Journal of Philosophy of Education. 35,(1), 115-130.

Epstein, M. N. (1999). “Post-Atheism: From apophatic theology to minimal religion”. In M. Epstein, A. Genis and S. Vladir-Glover (eds.). Russian Postmodernism: New Perspectives. (pp. 163-171). New York: Berghahn Books.

Gitlin, A. (1990). Educative Research, Voice and School Change. Harvard Educational Review, 60,(4), 443-466.

Gough, N. (1996) Virtual geography, video art and the global environment: postmodernist possibilities for environmental education research. Environmental Education Research ,2,(3), 379-389.

Gupta, A. & Ferguson, J. (2002). Spatializing States: Towards an Ethnography of Neoliberal Governmentality. Journal of American Ethnologist, 29,(4), 981-1002.

Guyver, R. (2009). Towards a definition of protocols when embedding the national and the civic in a history curriculum. Southern African Review of Education, 15,(1), 63-78.

Hardy, C. & Philips, N. (1999). No Joking Matter: Discursive struggle in the Canadian Refugee System. Organization Studies, 20,(1), 1-24.

Hoffman, D.M. (1998). Culture and Comparative Education: Towards Re-centering and De- centring the Discourse. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the CIES, New York: Buffalo.

187

Hoffman, D.M. (1996). Culture and Self in Multicultural Education: Reflections on Discourse, Text, and Practice. American Educational Research Journal, 3,(3), 545-569.

Hsieh, H.F. & Shannon, S.E. (2005). Three Approaches to Qualitative Content Analysis. Qualitative Health Research, 15,(9), 1277-1288.

Indakwa, J. (1978).A Lingua Franca for Africa: A study for the need for common African Language. Kiswahili Journal. 48,(1), 57–73.

Kymlicka, W. (1999). Theorizing Indigenous Rights, University of Toronto Law Journal, 49, 281- 293.

Krefting, L (2002). Rigor in qualitative research: the assessment of trustworthiness.

American Journal of Occupational Therapy, 45,(3), 214-222.

Ladson-Billings, G. (1995). Towards a Culturally Relevant Pedagogy, American Educational Research Journal, 32 ,(3), 465-491.

Lather, P. (1986). Research as Praxis. Harvard Educational Review, 56,(3), 257-277.

Lather, P. (1986b). ‘Issues of validity in openly ideological research: Between a rock and a soft place’, Interchange, 1,(4), 63-84.

LeCompte, M.D. (2000). "Analyzing Qualitative Data." In Tierney, W. and Twombly, S. (eds.), Getting Good Data to Improve Educational Practice, theme issue of Theory Into Practice, Vol. 39,(3), 146-155.

Leighton, N, R. (2004). The nature of Citizenship Education provision: an initial study. The Curriculum Journal, 15,(2), 167-181.

Little, V. (1990). A National Curriculum in History: A very Contentious Issue. British Journal of Educational Studies. 38,(4), 319-334.

Mazrui, A. (1992). Roots of Kiswahili: Colonialism, Nationalism and the Dual Heritage. Ufahamu, 20,(3), 80-100.

Mazrui, A & Ali, M. (1993). Dominant Languages in a plural Society; Kiswahili and English in Post Colonial East Africa. International Political Review. 14,(3), 275-292.

McCutcheon, G. (1981). On the Interpretation of Classroom Observations. Educational Researcher, 10,(5), 5-10.

McLaughlin, T.H. (1992). Citizenship, Diversity and Education: A Philosophical Perspective. Journal of Moral Education. 21,(3) 235-250.

188

Modiba, M. (2003). Language and Cultural Recognition in South Africa: Challenges Towards Culturally Meaningful Pedagogy. Education as Change. 7,(1), 50-60.

Modiba, M. & Odhiambo, A. (2007). Promoting Nationhood through Teaching: Fallacy or Reality? The International Journal of Interdisciplinary Social Sciences, 2,(5), 183-190.

Modiba, M. & Odhiambo, A. (2009). Teachers’ Understanding of a Kenyan Identity as a Basis for their Teaching Strategies, African Identities, 7,(4), 477-490.

Modiba, M. & Van Rensburg, W. (2006). The role of language within a varied and interdisciplinary Arts and Culture curriculum: Meaning-making for Art facilitators. Education as Change, 27-40.

Modiba, M. & Van Rensburg ,W. (2009). Cultural Diversity in the Classroom: Implications for curriculum literacy in South African Classrooms. Pedagogy, Culture and Society. 17,(2), 177- 187.

Morse, J.M. (2000). Researching Illness and Injury: Method Determining Sample Size. Qualitative Health Research, 10,(1), 3-5.

Muchmore, J. A. (2001). The story of ‘Anna’: A life history study of the literacy beliefs and teaching practices of an urban high school English teacher. Teacher Education Quarterly, 28, (3), 89-110.

Nussbaum, M. (1994). Patriotism and Cosmopolitanism. Boston Review, X1X (5).

Osborne, K. (2000). Our History Syllabus has us Gasping: History in Canadian Schools-Past, Present and Future. Canadian Historical Review, 81,(3), 404-435.

Osborne, K. (2002). Teaching History in Canadian Schools: A Century of Debate. Canadian Issues/Themes Canadians, October-November, 4-7.

Osborne, K. (2003). Teaching History in Canadian Schools. Journal of Curriculum Studies. 35,(5), 585-626.

Patton, M.Q. (2001). Evaluation, Knowledge Management, Best Practices, and High Quality Lessons Learned. American journal of Education, 22,(3), 329-336.

Preuss, U., Everson, M., Koenig-Archibugi, M. and Edwig Hefebre, (2003). Traditions of Citizenship in the European Union. Citizenship Studies, 7,(1), 3-12.

Rawls, J. (1993). The Law of Peoples. Critical Inquiry (Fall), 20,(1), 36-68. New York: Columbia University Press, 1993.

Said, E. W. (1993). Culture and Imperialism, London: Chatton & Windus.

189

Santome, J. (1996): The Presence of Different Cultures in Schools: Possibilities of Dialogue and Action. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 4,(1), xx.

Slattery, P. (1995). Curriculum Development in the Post-modern Era, New York: Garland.

Stremlau, J. (1999). African Renaissance and International Relations. South African Journal of International Affairs. 6,(2), 61-80.

Tschannen-Moran, M. (1998). Teacher Efficacy: Its Meaning and Measure. Review of Educational Research, 88,(2), 202-248.

Townsend, T. (1994). Effective Schooling for the Community - Core-plus Education, London: Routledge.

Varynen, R.: Global Transformation, Economics, Politics, Paper presented at The Finnish

National Fund for Research and Development, Sitra 161, Helsinki, 1997.

Wang, G. & Yeh, E. (2005). Globalization and Hybridization in Cultural Products: The cases of Mulan and Crouching and Cultural Sciences) Conference: The Unifying Aspects of Cultures, Vienna, Austria, November 7-9 2003.

Wang, G. & Yueh-yu Yeh, E. (2005). Tiger, Hidden Dragon. International Journal of Cultural Studies, 8,(2), 175-193.

White, J. (1996). Liberalism, Nationality and Education. Journal of Studies in Philosophy and Education. 15,(1-2), 193-199.

Internet Articles

Kerr, D. (2003). Citizenship Education in England: The making of a new subject. Online Journal of Social Science Education, 2, 1-11.

Government Documents

Chacha, D.M. (2003). Julius Nyerere: The Intellectual Pan Africanist and the Question of African Unity. Paper presented at CODESRIA 30TH Anniversary Grand Finale Conference and Celebrations in Dakar. 10-12 December.

Koech Report (2000): Totally Integrated Quality Education and Training (TIQET). Nairobi: Government Printers.

Nyerere, J. (1966). Freedom and Unity: A selection from writings and speeches 1952-1965. Dar- Es-Salaam: OUP.

190

Republic of Kenya (1964/1965). The National Assembly House of Representatives Official Report. December 14, 1964-May 12 1965. Nairobi: Government Printers

Republic of Kenya (1968/1969). The National Assembly House of Representatives Official Report. December 14, 1968-May 12 1969. Nairobi: Government Printers.

Republic of Kenya, (2000). Ministry of Education, History Syllabus.

Republic of Kenya, (2002). Secondary Education Syllabus. Volume Three.

Republic of Kenya.(2004). East African Community Secretariat.

Upton, A. F. (1999). History and National Identity: Some Finnish Examples. In National History and Identity, Approaches to the Writing of National History in the Northeast Baltic Region Nineteenth and Twentieth Century. Helsinki: Finnish Literature Society. ISBN 951-717-937-5

Unpublished Work

Graven, M. H . (2002). Mathematics Teacher Learning Communities of Practice and the Centrality of Confidence. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Johannesburg: University of the Witwatersrand.

Kishe, A.M. (2003). The Englishization of Tanzanian Kiswahili: A Study in Language Contact and Change. PhD Thesis, University of Illinois, USA.

Potterton, M. (1999). Despite the Difficulties: Towards and Understanding of the Elusive Qualities that Make for Good Schools in the Southern African Context. Unpublished Masters Research Report, University of Witwatersrand, Johannesburg.

191

Appendix 1: Invitation to the school to participate in the Study

Invitation to Participate Dear Mr/Mrs/Ms ....

I am conducting research into the teaching of History and Government in secondary schools for my PhD studies and invite you to allow teachers in your school to voluntarily participate in the study. I request your permission to have access to one or two Form One teachers to observe at least three of their history lessons and discuss these lessons after observing them. Their involvement will entail: 1) Classroom observations where the researcher will be a non-participant observer; 2) Stimulated recall discussions which will include questions which reflect on what they considered important when teaching to implement the requirements of History and Government; 3) Reflective discussions on strategies used and collaborative discussions with the researcher as to other methods which could be implemented; 4) Teachers will also be requested to complete a Participant Profile Form to enable researchers to get an overview of the sample for the study.

If acceptable to teachers, the discussions will be audio-taped so that the conversation can flow without interruption and information obtained from the interview can be easily captured and then transcribed. I wish to observe and audio-tape some of the lessons so that afterwards we can discuss and reflect upon the approach and methods the teachers have chosen to use.

In addition I request that these teachers be fully informed of the aims of the study and that their consent is obtained. Also it is necessary to point out to them that consenting to being in the study requires them to participate on a voluntary basis to provide me with greater clarity about the ideas and processes that have gone into their lesson plans and teaching. They are not required to take part in this as part of their job. If you agree to allow them to participate, you understand that they will discuss their lessons with me for between 1-2 hours per lesson over a 8 week period at an agreed upon location. The interview will include questions about their knowledge of the History and Government sytllabus and what they think about teaching strategies that can help facilitate the fulfilment of its aims.

192

I would greatly appreciate it if you would respond to my request as soon as possible and, if necessary, provide me with more guidance on your requirements for school visits that will not be compromising to both you as the principal, the teachers and the students.

Aim of the Study I am conducting an inquiry into the teaching of History and Government for nation-building. I am interested in learning about how teachers understand the concepts and underlying principles of this aim. Their understanding will be clarified by providing empirical evidence collected from lessons and how they are understood by the teachers. The aim is to capture what informs teachers’ performance at classroom level in their efforts to meet the requirements of this aim by answering the following questions: 1. What material /content and activities are used by the teachers in the lessons? 2. What are the aspects/factors that reflect their understanding of the aim? 3. How do they explain their teaching in relation to the aim?

Background Rationale of the Study The History and Government syllabus has implications for the kind of nation-building that Kenya is envisaging for herself. Teachers are expected to be able to translate its aims when planning lessons and teaching them. To facilitate this, they are provided with the content they are supposed to teach to promote an understanding of what it means to be Kenyan. However, translating this aim into practice is likely to be challenging because of the critical stance that is required if the content that is to be taught has to assist students to understand what unifies culturally the people of Kenya.

Therefore, to grasp the teachers’ understanding of this aim it is important that I obtain the ‘emic’ or ‘inside’ perspective that can provide evidence and insights from them as people ‘within’ the subject. The study will thus involve research that extends an understanding of lessons to include the uncovering and addressing of issues which may have emerged during their teaching. I hope the reflections that will be conducted will encourage “best practice’ within your school, its recognition and use for purposes of innovation ‘and improving teaching. Principles such as ‘improvement during research’, community knowledge’ and ‘social justice’ will be discussed. Teachers will be encouraged to reflect on the relevance to the syllabus aims of the content they used to teach, the activities and interactions in the lessons the used as part of their teaching strategies. It is necessary to examine factors and strategies which promote or hinder the successful implementation of the syllabus aims. For this to happen the proposed research will be collaborative in order to capture, reflect and discuss as equals the teaching of History and Government. Teachers will be drawn into reflecting on their teaching the aim of reinforcing or improving it.

193

What is of interest in the study Support materials such as the History and Government syllabus, guideline manuals and textbooks play an important role in assisting teachers to teach the syllabus effectively. In general, many refer to them for the selection of content, planning classroom activities and worksheets for teaching. The support materials that have been provided to assist teachers in the implementation of the History and Government requirements will be examined. Data will be recorded by audio-tape subject to the consent of all involved. Handwritten field notes will also be made to capture as much detail as possible.

Voluntary Participation If you agree to participate in this study you understand that the participation of your staff is totally voluntary. They can refuse to answer a particular question or withdraw at any time. They are not required to take part in this study as part of their job. Refusal to participate will involve no penalty or loss of benefits to which they (the teachers) are otherwise entitled. They may discontinue participation at any time. You understand that anything the data collected is confidential and will not be made available to any supervisor or employer.

Study Procedures . Classroom observations . Stimulated recall discussions . Reflective and collaborative discussions

If your teachers agree to participate, you understand that they will be interviewed for between 1-2 HOURS each week over 8 weeks. This will be at your school after the lessons they have taught.

Participation You can decide NOT to allow your teachers to participate in this study without any consequences. Your refusal to participate will have no effect on your work or employment.

Alternative to Study Participation Teachers can decide NOT to participate in this study without any consequences. Their refusal to participate will have no effect on their work or employment.

Benefits or Risks of being involved in the study It is hoped that their participation will help teachers to reflect on their teaching. They may wish to revise the criteria and the way they teach as a contribution to their own professional development and improving the quality of teaching and learning. The indirect benefit is that the school’s r participation

194 may help teachers to support their colleagues in implementing effectively the History and Government syllabus and ultimately contribute to increasing the quality of their teaching.

Confidentiality You understand that data collected in the study is confidential. To ensure confidentiality, no identifying information about your school or staff will be recorded. No names or other identifying data will appear in the data transcripts. Research records will be used for the writing up of the PhD thesis and academic publications.

Compensation There is no compensation for participating in the study.

Refusal or Withdrawal of Participation If your teachers agree to participate in this study, you understand that their participation is totally voluntary. They can refuse to answer a particular question or withdraw at any time.

Withdrawal from the study/ If any teachers decide to withdraw from the study, a form will be readily available for them to sign to indicate unwillingness to continue with the study.

Anticipated circumstances under which participation may be terminated by the researcher without regard to their consent: . Where there is reluctance to provide data that they might find compromising to their interests the researcher will withdraw their participation. . Where it is the participant’s decision to withdraw from the study a form will be readily available to sign to indicate unwillingness to continue. This can then be produced as evidence of non-response in the study and the orderly termination of participation by the teacher(s). . Any significant new findings or adverse effects developed during the course of the research which may relate to a teacher’s willingness to continue participation will be provided to him/her/them.

Protection of Participants This is participation that is voluntary. You teachers are free to withdraw from the study at any time. The identity of respondents will be protected. Names, addresses and otyher identifiers will not be recorded on the research instruments and data.

Feedback You will be provided with findings and results of the study when they are available.

195

Ethics The design methodology is ethically compliant and every effort has been made to ensure the protection of your school and the teachers.

Questions If you have any questions about this study or the rights of the participant, you may contact:  Angela Odhiambo on 011 646 3883 or 082 875 9577 or stews@mweb.co.za  Prof. Maropeng Modiba, Faculty of Education, University of Johannesburg, (+27 11 559 2670).  Prof Brigitte Smit: Chair of Ethics Committee, University of Johannesburg, [which exists to protect the welfare of people taking part in research and approved recruitment for this study].

Written Consent to Participate in Study

I hereby agree for the school to participate in the study. I expect to be given a copy of this consent form to keep.

______Signature of Principal

______Signature of Person Obtaining Consent Date

196

Appendix 2: Letters to teachers

Letter 1

LETTER OF CONSENT FOR TEACHERS

Dear ______

I am a Doctoral Student and supervised by Professor Modiba in the Department of Education Studies at the University of Johannesburg. I am conducting a research study to find out how teachers understand the syllabus of History and Government in the secondary school and its underlying theory and aims.

I am requesting your participation, which will involve you teaching your normal History and Government lessons. I wish to be present in at least three of these lessons over a period of 8 weeks. Your participation in this study is voluntary. If you choose not to participate or to withdraw from the study at any time, there will be no penalty (it will not affect your school or work). The results of the research study may be published, but your name will not be used.

Although there may be no direct benefit to you, the possible benefit of your participation is that this is an opportunity for you to reflect on your teaching and identify strategies that can help improve the teaching of History and Government to your students.

If you have any questions concerning the research study or your child’s participation in this study, please call me, Angela Odhiambo on number (0472) 184-5736,

Angela Odhiambo

By signing below, you are giving consent to participate in the above study.

______Signature Printed name Date

If you have any questions about your rights as a participant in this research, or you feel you or your child have been placed at risk, you can contact your school principal. Auckland Park Kingsway Campus / Cnr Kingsway and University Road Auckland Park P O Box 524 Auckland Park 2006 Johannesburg Republic of South Africa / Tel + 27 11 489 2911/www.uj.ac.za

197

Letter 2

PARENTAL LETTER OF CONSENT FOR MINORS Dear Parent

I am a Doctoral Student under the direction of Professor Modiba in the Department of Education Studies at the University of Johannesburg. I am conducting a research study to find out how teachers understand the aims of teaching History and Government in the secondary school.

I am requesting your permission for my presence in lessons in which your child is involved which will affect at least three lessons in 8 weeks. During these lessons your child will participate in lessons as s/he usually does. The teachers will be in charge throughout the lesson. Your child’s participation in this study is voluntary. If you choose not to have your child participate or to withdraw your child from the study at any time, there will be no penalty (it will not affect your child’s grade) Likewise, if your child chooses not to participate or to withdraw from the study at any time, there will be no penalty. The results of the research study may be published, but your child’s name will not be used.

Although there may be no direct benefit to your child, the possible benefit of your child’s participation is the improvement of teaching history in the secondary schools.

If you have any questions concerning the research study or your child’s participation in this study, please call me, Angela Odhiambo on number (0472) 184-5736,

Angela Odhiambo

By signing below, you are giving consent to your child ______to participate in the above study.

______Signature Printed name Date

If you have any questions about your child’s rights as a participant in this research, or you feel you or your child have been placed at risk, you can contact your child’s school principal. Auckland Park Kingsway Campus / Cnr Kingsway and University Road Auckland Park P O Box 524 Auckland Park 2006 Johannesburg Republic of South Africa / Tel + 27 11 489 2911/www.uj.ac.za

198

Letter 3

ASSENT FORM FOR STUDENTS

I have been told that my parents (mum or dad) have given permission (said its okay) for me to take part in lessons in which you are a visitor in our school.

I will be participating normally in lessons.

I am taking part because I wish to. I know that I can stop at any time I wish to and it will be okay if I wish to stop.

______Sign your name here. Print your name here.

Auckland Park Kingsway Campus / Cnr Kingsway and University Road Auckland Park P O Box 524 Auckland Park 2006 Johannesburg Republic of South Africa / Tel + 27 11 489 2911/www.uj.ac.za

199

Appendix 3: Observation Schedule

1. When observing teachers’ lessons the researcher was looking for the following activities:

- Identify strategies adopted for teaching – focus was on how they are employed in the classroom interaction. - Role played by both teachers and students in the lessons i.e., how are teachers facilitating activities and what activities are students engaged with? - Questions used to guide the above were: what methods of teaching are used? What is involved when these methods are used? What is the nature of questions or tasks that are given? What is the purpose of teaching?

2. What characterise the teaching of the selected content as a supportive curriculum tool?

- Features and structure that are important (expectations – justifications and reality – identification of consistencies and gaps in how the content is dealt with). - Other texts drawn upon – conceptual contextualisation of content (dealing with concepts that are integral to the content, does the engagement with the content make clear its underlying meaning and implications for the aim of the syllabus).

3. Content as policy tool

- What is the intention of selecting it? (What is its role in the teachers’ work? For example, is it an authoritative, mediating, critical thinking or democratic learning resource?) - What are the underlying assumptions about teachers as syllabus implementers?

4. What assumptions underlie the lesson with regard to:

- teaching and learning? - assessment? - learners’ and teachers’ role in the lesson?

200

Appendix 4: Interview/Discussion Schedule

Interview/discussion guide for Pilot Study

Review of recorded lesson, teachers reflects on lesson and uses it as a basis for conversation.

Please take me through the lesson, what were you doing and what were you hoping to achieve?

What does using the methods you used mean for you?

Why do you think the methods you use are important?

What other teaching strategies do you normally use in the classroom?

Why do you use them?

When teaching this way, what do you hope to achieve?

201

Appendix 5: Pilot Study Observed Lessons

Day 1

19th September 2005

Class Setting: The lesson was held in Form One P classroom. The classroom is used for all the subjects. It had enough space for the teacher to move around. There was a teacher’s table at the front. There were 45 learners in the classroom, sitting in pairs (two by two) except for one facing the board. The lesson was conducted between 12:20 and 1:00 pm. The topic was ‘Social, Economic and Political Organization of the Kenyan Peoples’.

The teacher writes on the board as she says ‘socio-economic and political organization of Kenyan peoples’, after which she stands facing the students and talks to them:

Teacher: We are going to look at the social, political and economic organization of the Bantu, Nilotes, and Cushites. These are the three major groups that settled in Kenya.

Now lets us look at the Bantus. Who are the Bantus? Give us example of the Bantu.

Learner: Highland Bantus.

Learner: Western Bantus.

Learner: Coastal Bantus.

Teacher: Yes, we are not going to go into details because we already did this in our previous lessons. Today we will look at their social organization. What do we mean by social organization?

Learner: It is things about culture and the way they interact. It also includes their religious beliefs.

Teacher: Before the coming of the Europeans, that is before colonization, most Bantu groups were organized in clans, that is people who descended from one ancestor formed a clan. Some groups circumcised boys and other circumcised both boys and girls. Which groups circumcised both boys and girls?

Learner: Maasai?

Teacher: No.

Learner: Kikuyus.

Learners: No (in chorus).

Teacher: Why don’t you find out from your parents if Kikuyus did circumcise their girls because she may just be right?

Learner: Abagusii.

202

Teacher: Yes. The initiates were taught values of the society, customs of the society by their elders. Each initiate joined an age group and who can tell us the functions of an age group or let’s say age sets? Yes?

Learner: They defended the community from external attacks.

Learner: Some of the communities picked out their leaders from the age groups.

Learner: They created a strong social bond as they worked together. They would build huts for the community.

Learner: They would also advise the junior elders.

Teacher: Religion had developed, not Christianity but an African way of worship. They believed in gods who controlled their destiny. Now who can tell us the name of these gods? What did the Abaluhyia call their god?

Learner: Were.

Learner: They also called god Nyasaye.

Teacher: Yes they called their god Were or Nyasaye. What about the Kikuyu?

Learners: Ngai.

Teacher: They also believed in ancestral spirits and life after death. The ancestral spirits played the role of intermediaries or they acted as go-betweens between man and the gods. They had diviners and medicine men who played a very important role in the community. What was the name of a medicine man in Kikuyu?

Learner: Mundu Mugo.

Teacher: Yes the Mundu Mugo had special powers. Another thing is that the Bantus celebrated life in both song and dance. They had songs and dances for various ceremonies like marriage songs, ceremonies during birth, initiation and even harvest time.

(A learner is raising her hands).

Teacher: Yes?

Learner: Do they also have ceremonies in death?

Teacher: Yes they had a celebration. I understand among the Kikuyu they never buried their dead so the celebration of the dead will be for those communities who celebrated death and burial rituals.

Learner: How can people celebrate when one dies? If someone dies we mourn, we do not celebrate. I do not understand this.

203

Teacher: The mourning process is like a celebration. Communities do different things, for example we have those who shave their hair and some people cover themselves or rather smear red paint on themselves during the mourning period to celebrate the life of the person.

Teacher: They also carried out sporting activities like wrestling and archery, that is the shooting competition. (Writes this on the board).

Teacher: Any question before we move on to political organization? (Learners are quiet, no response). Now that you are quiet I want to believe that it means you are okay.

(Teacher writes ‘Bantu political organization’ on the board).

Teacher: Most of the Bantus had a decentralized form of government. What does that mean? (Silence from students).

Teacher: This whereby power is rested in a group of people like we have a council of elders. Now in a situation where we have one ruler as the head then we refer to that as ‘a centralized form of government’. For example in Kenya we had the Wanga community, in Uganda we had the Baganda. These were the communities that had one ruler as the head of the community. Now how did they govern themselves? We have just said that they had a decentralized kind of government. This means that they were organized in clans and remember we said that clans are made up of people who are closely related, they shared the same ancestor and each clan was headed by a council of elders. In Kikuyu the council of elders was referred to as Kiama and the Miji kenda called it the Kambi. (The teacher writes ‘Kiama’ and ‘Kambi’ on the board). Let us look at the functions of the council of elders across the Bantu groups. (Writes ‘functions of council of elders’ on the board. Learners raise their hands).

Teacher: Yes?

Learner: They settled disputes.

Teacher: Yes?

Learner: Ensured that law and order was enforced.

Teacher: Yes, they ensured that law and order was enforced, that is right, another function? Yes?

Learner: They presided over religious disputes.

Learner: They decided whether warriors could go to war or not.

Teacher: That is correct.

Learner: Advised the chiefs on policy matters.

(Teacher writes these points on the board: ‘settle disputes, religious ceremonies, declared wars, warning to alert the community in case of an epidemic, good relations existed between neighbours,

204 served as spokesmen of the community, organized inter tribal marriages, made decisions for community, set dates and places for functions to be held in the community’).

Learner: Were they the ones who circumcised the boys?

Teacher: There were a group of specialists who did that, not the whole group of elders.

Learner: Was it a must that the boys must be circumcised? What if they didn’t want?

Teacher: Initially Bantus never used to circumcise but this was a practice that they borrowed from the Cushites and after some time it became a part of their life. It has been internalized and this is the way that they socialize their youth and so it is a must, no one can decide not to be circumcised otherwise it has to be carried out by force.

Teacher: What happens when a boy is not circumcised?

Learner: Among the Kikuyu it is said that a person who is not circumcised is still young, he cannot be considered as a man. They have a name for it – kehe.

Teacher: Yes if a boy was not circumcised in my community the boy would be thrown out of the community as an outsider. He cannot own property even in death, by the way he could not be buried unless he had been circumcised.

Teacher: Kingship was hereditary, it ran along the family life and the Kings were assisted by the council of elders. Up to that point. Who has any question to ask? Any question? (silence).

Now let us look at the economic activities or organization. (Writes ‘economic activities’ on the board). Who can tell us some of the economic activities of the Bantu? Yes?

Learner: Farming, I mean crop farming.

Teacher: Yes, that is one activity. Crop cultivation. What crops did they cultivate?

Learner: Arrow roots.

Teacher: Yes, traditional crops.

Learner: Millet.

Learner: Wheat.

Teacher: Wheat? Is that a traditional crop? (Some learners say ‘No’). No, that was introduced by the White settlers.

Learner: Sorghum.

Teacher: Yes sorghum, that is a traditional crop. Anything else?

Learner: Yams.

205

Teacher: Yes, yams and also Cassava.

Teacher: Apart from crop cultivation what else did they practice? Yes?

Learner: They were blacksmiths.

Teacher: Yes, they had iron-working skills and what kind of things did they make?

Learner: Spears.

Learner: Hoes.

Learner: Knives.

Teacher: Yes, they knew the art of iron-working and were able to make better tools for cultivation, hunting and even fighting.

Learner: They also traded with their neighbours.

Teacher: Yes, but that is not complete, you must be able to tell us what they traded in and with whom.

Learner: The Luhyias traded with the Luos.

Teacher: In what?

Learner: Baskets and pots.

Teacher: Who gave who what?

Learner: The Luos gave the Luhyias baskets and pots and the Luhyias gave them iron tools and grains.

Learner: They were hunters and gatherers.

Learner: They kept bees.

Teacher: An example of a community that kept bees?

Learner: The Akamba.

Learner: Drum-making.

Learners: No! (The bell rings).

Teacher: Why do you say no didn’t they make drums?

Learners: (Some say ‘Yes’ some ‘No’).

Teacher: There are those Bantu communities who made drums like the Akamba, so don’t just say ‘no’. Haven’t you heard of the Akamba drums? This is not a new thing, it has been with Kambas ever since. Okay. Any other economic activity of the Bantu?

206

Learner: Raiding their neighbours.

Teacher: that is stealing it cannot be an economic activity. During this period it was an economic activity and was not viewed as stealing at all. Okay our time is up. Next lesson we shall look at individual Bantu groups. We will look at the Kikuyu and the Miji kenda. Because there are very many communities we will only deal with those two, but the rest I will give you to do as an assignment. Enjoy your lunch.

Teacher leaves class.

Day 2

20th September 2005

Time: 2:50 – 3:30 pm

The classroom setting is the same. The teacher starts the lesson by having a review of the previous lesson. She looks at how the Bantu organized themselves economically, socially and politically. After the review, the teacher introduced the next topic, which was about the Agikuyu. They talked about how the Agikuyu organized themselves socially, economically and politically.

Day 3

21st September 2005

Time: 2:10 – 2:50 pm

The classroom setting is the same. The general lesson procedure was more or less like the two described above. The teacher reviewed the previous lesson by asking the learners about the social organization of the Abagusii and as they stated the activities that the Abagusii engaged in during this time the teacher wrote each one that was mentioned on the board. After describing the social organization of the Abagusii, the teacher moved on to discuss the political and economic activities. As they discussed and answered the teacher’s questions, the learners wrote notes. By the end of the lesson, the teacher expected the learners to have an understanding of the Bantu communities that they had discussed, that is the Kikuyu, the Abagusii and the Miji kenda. Learners did not have any questions and the teacher told them to start reading about the Nilotes specifically the Luo. The learners were to look at the social, economic and political organizations of the Luo in the 19th century.

207

In the boys’ school, the following was observed:

Day 1

26th September 2005.

Class setting: The lesson was held in Form One C from 9:30 to 10:10am. The teacher stood at the front (where there was a teacher’s desk) and the students all sat in rows facing the board. There were 52 students.

The teacher revisited the previous lesson on the political organization of the Miji kenda.

Teacher: So yesterday we looked at the political, social and economic organization of the Miji kenda and I am sure you are able to remember some of the things that we looked at. So what is the basis of the political setup of the Miji kenda?

Learner: The age set.

Teacher: The age set, what about them? What did we talk or rather say about them?

Learner: Boys joined age sets after circumcision.

Teacher: That is why we said the age set grouping formed an important political setup. What else about the Miji kenda did we talk about? Yes.

Learner: They were organized in clans.

Teacher: They were organized in clans and we said clans formed the basis or they played the central point in the political administration of the Miji kenda. Anything else? What we learned yesterday? Yes?

Learner: Kayas.

Teacher: We also talked about the Kaya. What were the Kayas among the Miji kenda? Yes?

Learner: They were fortified villages.

Teacher: Yes they were fortified villages for what purposes?

Learner: Security purposes.

Teacher: Security purposes and we said that security was enhanced by them having one particular entrance. Anything else that we talked about?

Learner: Political.

Learner: Political, political we said they had council of elders.

Teacher: What were their functions? Yes?

208

Learner: They presided over important ceremonies that took place in the community.

Teacher: And we said that the people who were given these positions were those with a lot of knowledge so their knowledge was used. That is on the political setup. Let us proceed still on political organization. The Miji kenda had junior age sets (teacher writes this on the board), the members of this age set were charged with the responsibility of defending the community. Remember if a kingdom had to be strong it needed to have strong warriors. Any time the community was threatened or raided the warriors were called upon to go and fight. They were charged with the responsibility of defending.

Let us look at the social organization of the Miji kenda (writes on the board).

Remember we said there are three main aspects, political, economic and social. As I said before most of these practices are common in the other Bantu communities. Like in any other African community the Miji kenda also believed in the existence of one god. They called their god Mulungu just like the Meru. Remember we said religion forms the basis of the social setup of every community (writes). Their prayers were made directly to Mulungu. There was no interference. They also offered sacrifices. This was meant to appease the gods whenever there were calamities like drought, famine and floods. They were also offered as acts of celebration, protection and blessing. (As the teacher talks and writes on the board, the learners write down the notes as well). Every time there was a bumper harvest they would offer sacrifices for thanksgiving. They could also offer sacrifices for protection and blessings.

The Miji kenda also had priests (writes) who presided over important religious ceremonies and rituals.

They had medicine men and diviners. These people played a significant role in the community. People could approach them in case of problems. This means that they were actually interacting in the society. Man is a social being, can’t live without other people, alone you need others. The Miji kenda also believed in the existence of the spirits and ancestral spirits. They believed that the spirits gave them guidance on matters affecting their families. The spirits, especially the ancestral spirits, acted as mediators. They mediated between the community and god. In other words we are saying that if you go against the community what would happen?

Learner: People would suffer.

Teacher: Yes they were to guide and lead people of the community. The elder members of the community were charged with the responsibility of transmitting the social values and norms to the community. So what were some of these norms or values?

Learner: Circumcision.

Teacher: How is this a value?

209

Learner: Inheriting.

Teacher: What do you have that you would pass on?

Learner: They teach leadership.

Teacher: In a family setup, in a home situation what would you teach your siblings?

Learner: Role model.

Teacher: What else? Yes we are assuming that you are the first born?

Learner: Advising them.

Teacher: On what issues?

Learner: Like good manners, good eating habits and things like that.

Teacher: Yes in the Miji kenda community the elders transmitted good values to the community. Like when you were circumcised they were taught to be strong hence they were not supposed to cry. They were prepared to be strong valued members of the community. Another thing is that the Miji kenda highly respected the religious places of worship. These areas of worship are called shrines (writes the word ‘shrine’ on the board). And if the shrines were not respected it is believed that a calamity would befall the community so they had to respect these areas, they had to be well kept. Okay I hope you have written that down. Now let us look at the economic organization of the Miji kenda. (Writes on board). We have looked at the political and social and now we look at the economic. Remember we said that the economic activities of all these communities were the same. So they traded depending where they lived, they were farmers, we looked at the Rendile we said they were pastoralists so what other economic activities did they have apart from farming? The Miji kenda like the other communities practised farming, fishing, and iron-working, traded with their neighbours the Rabai, Ndigo, Nkabe and Choru. They also practiced hunting and gathering. Now that is just an overview of what they did. Now let us look into each activity in details. Now our first activity will be trade. The Miji kenda traded with their neighbours and who did we say their neighbours are?

Learner: The Rabai and Ndigo.

Teacher: Yes.

Learner: Nkabe.

Teacher: Yes Nkabe and who else?

Learner: The Choru.

210

Teacher: Yes they traded with their neighbours and we have just mentioned who they are and so what commodities did they exchange because as I have told you before when you mention trade you must also talk about the goods involved. So what were they exchanging for their goods?

Learner: Coconut.

Teacher: Yes in exchange for what.

Learner: In exchange for cloths, beads and ornaments.

Teacher: Another good?

Learner: They traded with the Ndigos who were potters and so they exchanged their pots with the Waswahili from whom they received some commodities like beads.

Teacher: Yes that is correct. Yes?

Learner: They also traded with the Akamba.

Teacher: Yes remember the Akamba were long distant traders, who joined the Miji kenda in the domination of the trade. The Miji kenda also traded with the Chagga people, the Taita and as we have mentioned the Kamba in the interior and they got the following goods: iron tools, grains, ivory, and rhinoceros horns amongst others. (Learners write down the notes as the teacher talks).

Teacher: The second economic activity was hunting and gathering. The men hunted wild game and this enabled them to supplement their diet. Women gathered fruits and vegetables and again we said these were supposed to be consumed at home.

The third economic activity was fishing. Remember we said when you mention fishing you must say where they fished. The Miji kenda fished along the riverbanks and also along the coast. What other economic activity did the Miji kenda engage in? Yes.

Learner: Basketry and pottery.

Teacher: Yes, the Miji kenda practiced pottery and basketry and weaving. These baskets and mats were used for trade and they were also used for storage. When they had a bumper harvest they would store the grains but trade in surplus. Next, some of the Miji kenda clans practised blacksmithing. The blacksmiths are the ones who manufactured the iron implements that were used for farming and hunting.

They also practiced salt mining. They obtained salt from the sea which was then filtered for domestic use. Now that brings us to the end of the Miji kenda’s social, political and economic organizations. Well before I leave can we get an overview of their political setup? How were they organized?

Learner: They were organized in clans.

211

Teacher: Yes clans formed the basis of their political organization.

Learner: They had age-sets.

Teacher: When the boys were circumcised they joined an age set.

Learner: Senior age sets formed a governing council called the Kambi.

Teacher: What were the functions of the Kambi?

Learner: They settled land disputes.

Learner: They were responsible for the administration of the land.

Learner: They presided over important religious ceremonies.

Teacher: Yes.

Learner: They organized raids and wars.

Teacher: Yes they were the ones to tell the warriors when to attack their neighbours and also when to raid them. Yes?

Learner: They maintained law and order.

Teacher: Any other aspect.

Learner: They lived in fortified villages called Kayas.

Teacher: Yes that is right now how about social organization?

Learner: They believed in a god called Mungu.

Learner: They worshiped their god directly.

Teacher: Yes speak.

Learner: They believed in medicine men and diviners.

Teacher: Yes.

Learner: They believed in spirits and ancestral spirits.

Teacher: Others, yes?

Learner: They also believed in prophets and prophetess.

Teacher: Other aspects?

Learner: They believed in priests.

Teacher: Well now how about economic?

Learner: They practiced fishing along the riverbanks.

212

Learner: They also traded with the Waswahili.

Learner: They were hunting and gathering.

(Laughter from class. The bell rings).

Teacher: Hunters and gatherers.

Learner: They were also long distant traders.

Learners seem to be in a hurry to leave the classroom, I think for break, and teacher tells them to read ahead for the next lesson.

Teacher: I hope the people presenting the two other Bantu groups are prepared for the next lesson.

Day 2

28th September 2005.

Time: 12:20-1:00pm.

It is a class presentation. Three students from the Ameru community presented the topic on The Ameru. The students talked about the social, political and economic practices of the Ameru community. The teacher and the rest of the students asked questions mainly for clarification purposes on issues that were either not clear for them or what they considered “new” in relation to the information they had gathered from the textbooks or from their prior knowledge

Day 3

30th September 2005.

Time: 2:00-2:40pm.

The lesson started late, at 2:20pm. There were visiting teachers from Nyanza province and so teachers were involved in a “peer assessment discussion”. The lesson was also in the form of a class presentation. Students from the Agikuyu community talked about the social organization of the Agikuyu people. When the lesson ended, it had to continue with the same learners talking about the economic and political practices of the Agikuyu people.

213

Appendix 6: Pilot Study Interviews

Researcher: Why did you teach the way you did?

Teacher: I wanted the learners to understand the concept of the clan because basically we know that most of the Bantu communities were clan-based and to make them understand what a clan is, that is, people who traced their decent from a common ancestry and the clan leaders when they came together, they formed a council. What were the functions of those councils? Like now we were saying they maintained law and order, to give policies, served as final court of appeal. So basically to make them understand how those old people used to govern, to give advice and how they used to do things for the community. You see, just to give them a kind of an organized system of the political situation, the political ideals, how were they actually organized? Because they never had a centralized kind of government. This concept of the council of elders of decentralization, how did it work which worked across all the communities? Because basically when we look at other communities, most of them had the council of elders, except Wanga who had a centralized system. So basically it is to make them see how these councils were used in administering policies, how they used to make the society coercive, people used to live together [pause].

Teacher [continues]: On the political setup, then on the social setup, I wanted them to see how - you know the social deals with culture and, culture is the way of life of a people.

Researcher [nods]: Yes.

Teacher: So what are some of the things that are involved in the cultural setup of any society? That is why we looked at things like religion, religion binds people together, it brings them together, and then we looked at things like circumcision, those initiation rites, what they were for if a person was to be initiated, what happened, he became a responsible member of the society. He was given responsibilities. Then we looked at other aspects, like for example the warriors, their social duties of defending and protecting other members of the community. If they were medicine men, if they were prophet, if they were diviners, what were their roles in bringing the social cohesiveness in that particular society? Then basically in the economic we looked at how the communities lived, how did they survive what economic activities they engaged in to meet their day-to-day needs. That is why we looked at things like trade.

Researcher: Yes.

Teacher: You know that every community had trade because in case there were surpluses they needed to exchange that for other things which they lacked. Then others like hunting and gathering, those have been traditional occupation of man ever since, then agriculture depending on where the community is based, because like the Miji kenda who are Bantus and most of the Bantu

214 communities have been farmers. Basically it is to make them understand that those economic activities that those people had during the pre-colonial period actually are the very same ones which we have today.

Researcher: Okay I see.

Teacher: Another thing is that these are Kenyans and we are dealing with Kenyan tribes so to make the learners understand better, I always encourage them to present - they can choose and present topics from their own tribe or they can just present any topic - but I never force them, they have to volunteer. That is why you saw in the two lessons students presenting to their classmates about the Ameru and the Agikuyu.

Researcher: How do you organize this, I mean the students’ presentation?

Teacher: Every time we talked about a community, I make sure that there is a student from that particular community who would tell us what they do, what are some of the economic activities etcetera, but we realize that the problem we have here, most of the boys are born and bred in town, most of them don’t even know what their roots are, if you ask them, they will always tell you I have always stayed in Nairobi, I have been born here, so sometimes it becomes difficult to tell them, even for them to know who they are and unless they receive these concepts through teaching which may not be practical, they will run away from their roots.

Researcher: How are you able to teach them these concepts that you are talking about?

Teacher: From my community, I’m a Meru, I try to show them actually who the Meru are because I understand the community, like when we talk of the council of elders the Miraa all those I felt as though I were home and actually they were enjoying, but you see now for them being born in Nairobi, it is difficult for them. But in fact I taught this topic in Nakuru and it was different because you could go to the actual community and see and the students would be able to identify with some of the things and the people. At times we encouraged and even went for interviews using their mother tongue but here it is difficult to achieve this because of the town setup.

The discussion then focused on what teaching methods would be appropriate if the teacher were to achieve goals of the policy. As the teacher explained:

Teacher: For me, I would engage in small group discussions within the class. I would group students depending on their background because I know in town it is balanced, there are Kikuyus, and there are Luos and so forth. I will mix the learners up then I will make sure that each of the communities is represented I would encourage them to share. To share what they have, to see what we can borrow and to see what we can leave out. I believe that by students sharing - because sometimes when we are looking at the people there are some areas where we want to make the

215 students talk, like for example we the Bantus, there are some words that are shared, that are borrowed, but they are of different meanings in each of the community so I would ask an Embu to use the same word in a statement or a Meru or a Kikuyu and I would show them how different these meanings are yet these words are the same when pronounced, they were borrowed. You see, because they migrated together, these words might have been borrowed from other tribes but because of the different movements they have undertaken different meanings. I do think that discussions can do that if you group learners according to the different tribal groups or backgrounds.

Researcher: So tell me, how do you work with the policy to achieve these objectives?

Teacher: I cannot lie that I have been able to look at the policy. What I do, I look at the topics, the objectives that are laid out in the syllabus and that is what I use. I don’t go to the policy of Koech and so forth.

Researcher: Yes. But do you have any idea of what the policy says? Do teachers do that?

Teacher: (Laughs) No. Teachers would look at them only when they are preparing for an interview because some of those things are kept in the principal’s office in my former school, because I’m new here but where I have been they are kept in the principal’s office.

Researcher: They are like special documents!

Teacher: Yes. But when the inspectors come they ask for those reports and whatever and also when you are preparing for an interview you go and borrow and read through but I don’t think we have a situation where the teachers are supposed to refer to them as such.

The other teacher had this to say as well:

Researcher: How do you work with the policy documents?

Teacher: No actually I don’t.

Researcher: How do you plan?

Teacher: Okay for planning, basically for all the teachers, planning is common when you are doing teaching practice, that is when you see them write lesson plans, schemes of work etcetera.

Researcher: So, now are you not supposed to plan?

Teacher: We do but we don’t. You know for the lesson plans at times we take them for granted. Well, although I do not have lesson plans, I do sit and plan for my lessons. I have to be well conversant with what I’m going to teach even if I don’t have it in a written form. But for the schemes of work we have to make them at the beginning of every term and then we hand them in to the HOD and then each teacher is given a copy.

216

Researcher: What informs your planning?

Teacher: Yes. I do use or rather plan with the objectives in mind. You get that from the schemes of work even though many a times you realize you are not on par with the scheme. Well, you know when you wrote the schemes you knew what to achieve but basically in most cases teachers do not refer, they just write them and hand them in as a procedure basically. Once the schemes have been given out, nobody really bothers to find out if the teachers are really following the schemes.

Researcher: Are you always able to translate the objectives, be it the long-term or short-term objectives into practice?

Teacher: I think it is not possible to achieve all your purposes. In a lesson you may have two or three objectives and you realize that by the end of the lesson you have at least achieved two so the third one you will integrate in another lesson, so sometimes it is overlooked or you don’t actually really follow because you should be systematic from the first day of the term. In this lesson I’m supposed to achieve this or that but you know the interruptions during the term and such things, so sometimes it is not possible to achieve each and every objective. But for every lesson you teach you have an objective that you have intended to achieve.

Researcher: How do you ensure that you achieve these intended objectives you have just mentioned?

Teacher: For example, in Form One we teach for national unity and national integration and we are supposed to look at factors that would promote or hinder national unity. So basically when talking about tribalism, we want them to transcend those tribal barriers and see themselves as one. I think as teachers we have always assumed that it is upon the students to make up their mind - do I remain a Kikuyu even after schooling or do I become a Kenyan a public figure? Because even in my class I always emphasize that when you come through schooling you should not look at yourself from a tribal perspective, we are Kenyans, be a citizen. However, I don’t think for a teacher it would be tangible because it all depends on how the students gets information and how the student is able to come out of I mean to have the information and transform and the idea that we give should help to bring about change and transformation. For us teachers ours is to avail the information and try and show them using for example their class session - you are a Luo, you are a Kikuyu, we have different cultural backgrounds, cultural practices but how are we to tolerate each other’s culture. If I’m a Meru, how am I able to respect you (addressing the researcher), how are we supposed to live, coexist regardless of our difference? So you try to show them that those disparities are there but you try to appreciate each other and for them to do that they must be aware of the disparities, what are the various cultural differences that exist amongst them and how are they affected by them.

The teacher from the boys’ school also had this to say:

217

Teacher: You see, like now when you teach the way the syllabus is arranged, we are looking at the Bantus and in that class we find that the students are also Bantus. We are looking at their way of life during that time before the coming of the Europeans and after Bantus we will look at the Nilotes and then the Cushites. I think to me that is also creating awareness, we are people who belong to Kenya and we should get rid of bias. You know when you look and learn about other people’s way of life it decreases bias,… so when you get to learn what they were doing and why or how they were doing things during that time. I think you are creating understanding and togetherness amongst the students so that they can know that they are people who belong to Kenya. We are all Kenyans.

218

Appendix 7: Lessons Observed for the Main study

Date: 31/05/2006

PGDW1

TIME: 8.15 – 9.30 AM.

NUMBER OF STUDENTS: 31

CLASS: FORM 1A

(The lesson starts at 8.35 for there was a delay at the Assembly)

Teacher: We shall try to cover what I had planned with you this morning. The lesson delayed because of morning prayers. This one is a continuation of what we had started on Monday, we said more about the Nilotes as a major group in Kenya. Let us have a review of what we covered on Monday lesson... when we talked more about the Nilotes. We said … the people speak a similar language; it means they can be able to understand one another in one way or the other. Similarly we tried to classify them into three broad categories; that is the River-Lake Nilotes, the Highland Nilotes and the Plain Nilotes. Out of that we introduced the first group who are the River-Lake Nilotes and generally we said that they are Luo speakers they speak this language called Dholuo and in one way or the other, they can be able to understand one another. Similarly we said that the River-Lake Nilotes are spread in Kenya, they are also found in Uganda, they are also found in some parts of Sudan. That means it is a big big group. In a similar note we also said that they had their own dispersal point and we call that area Bahr-el-Ghazal in the southern part of Sudan. So today we take this opportunity to continue from there and coming from you now we can get the group that comprises of the Luo speakers, whom we have found like either in Sudan, Uganda or Kenya. Now let me see if you can remember these groups that we highlighted.

Learner: The Acholi.

Teacher: We have the Acholi and we said the Acholi are found in which country? Yes.

Learner: Uganda.

Teacher: Yes the Acholi the majority of them are found in Uganda. Yes the second group?

Learner: The Jopaluo.

Teacher: Yes the Jopaluo very good. (K you had put up your hand).

K: The Joka Owiny.

219

Teacher: Not yet, we have not yet classified the Kenyan Luo.

Learner: The Dinka.

Teacher: Yes the Dinka, we also find the Dinka in parts of Sudan. (Teacher calls learner by name).

S.M.: Shiluk.

Teacher: The Shiluk very good who else. (Learners raise their hands). Now all your hands are up, who is ready to answer? (Learners: ‘me’, ‘me’). Yes, W?

W: Nuer.

Teacher: yes Nuer then we go down to yes A.

A: Amok.

Teacher: Yes the Amok very good yes who else?

Learner: Jopadhola.

Teacher: Yes, right Jopadhola, we call them Jopadhola. Now we are going to deal with what we call the general feeling of the River-Lake Nilotes. According to the oral traditions majority of the above group believed to have migrated from Bahr-el-Ghazal in southern Sudan. So we can say that this is what we call the original dispersal point. This is according to the oral traditions and other forms of historical information. So what might have made them migrate from this region, from southern Sudan? There were so many reasons, which made them to migrate so put it down that there were several reasons, which made them migrate into various parts of Uganda and Kenya. We are not going to repeat exactly what we had covered earlier. It is related to why they migrated because that will be forms of repetition but remember we are not dealing with the whole group of the River-lake Nilotes but with the Kenyan Luo. Now let us go to the topic of discussion, it is stated clearly that The People of Kenya up to the Nineteenth Century, so we are not going to deal with the people who settled in Uganda or those Luos who were left in Sudan but we shall deal with the Kenyan Luo because this is the group we are much interested. So we can see now that the Kenyan Luo migrated from southern Sudan into a place called Pabungu Pakwach in Uganda. Remember this information is received from the oral traditions, that the Kenyan Luo migrated from Sudan to Pabungu Pakwach. We can still state that according to oral traditions of the Kenyan Luo the above migration and settlement took place around A.D. fourteen fifty. Later on they moved into Kenya. Remember that this kind of information cannot be doubted, there is research done by people in relation to the beliefs of the community. Pabungu Pakwach may not be an area that we cannot trace in the modern Ugandan Map but it is the belief of the people that actually that is where their ancestors might have settled before coming to Kenya. So generally speaking assuming that the Kenyan Luo had settled in Kenya by fourteen fifty, let’s look at the reasons that made the

220

Luos migrate from Pabungu Pakwach. Although we had done the Nilotes in general, I think it is only fair to deal with the topic we are dealing with in relation to the topic of discussion. What are the main reasons that made the Luo to migrate from Pabungu Pakwach? These are just general views. The Nilotes generally had migrated for many reasons. Let us see Kenyan Luo in particular reasons will come from you. Yes one?

Learner: Population increase.

Teacher: There was high population pressure. That is very good. A very strong point. What else can we say made them to migrate, what else? S***?

S: Bad weather.

Teacher: She says bad weather, maybe instead of just saying that it is drought and famine which was as a result of bad weather. Yes?

Learner: Internal conflicts.

Teacher: Yes internal conflicts. M*** what is internal conflict?

M: Where the members of the tribe do not go to war but they do not agree among themselves.

Teacher: Yes, that is very good, it may occur between the same clan or family and they do not fight directly, it is a form of a conflict. Yes, another point?

Learner: Better fishing areas.

Teacher: Yes they were fishermen because the Luo were good fishermen and they were looking for better areas.

Learner: Disease and other epidemics affecting livestock and people.

Teacher: Yes, there was outbreak of diseases which affected the people and animals as well.

Learner: Need for adventure.

NY: Joka-jok

221

Teacher: That is the first wave, the second wave, C******, yes tell us.

C******: Joka-owiny (learner has difficulty pronouncing the word).

Teacher: Pronounce it properly J**** pronounce it the way it is supposed to be

J****: Joka-owiny (She pronounces it properly).

Teacher: Yes let us move on to the third wave. Yes N**** at the corner?

N****: Joka-omolo.

Teacher: Finally S*****, what was the last group?

S*****: I do not know.

(Laughter from the rest of the class).

Teacher: From M*** A**?

M*** A**: Luo Abasuba.

Learner: People of.

Teacher: ‘The people of’, that is very smart. Good I did not know you knew that. The term Joka means ‘the people of’, so when we say joka jok we mean the people of jok. This is whereby I wanted to have the class exercise. For the next ten minutes we are going to make use of the textbook. Let us make use of the textbook from page fifty nine. We are going to have the class exercise.

(Bell rings end of 1st lesson. The second lesson begins. 8.55-9.30 am.).

(Learners are reading from their textbooks, the teacher is walking in class checking if the learners are actually doing the reading.)

Learner: Are we writing down?

Teacher: We shall have what we call random presentation from any one of you.

(Learners get to open their textbooks and read about the waves of the Kenyan Luo. Teacher moves from the learners’ desks pinpointing what they have to do. Learners have been given ten minutes to carry out the exercise. Learners read work from the textbook and write down notes in their exercise books. After ten minutes, teacher asks learners to prepare class presentation in connection with the four waves that is the joka-jok, joka-owiny, joka-omolo and Luo Abasuba.)

Teacher: This is where we are going to trace their origin. Who will be our first volunteer, someone

222

The people of Jok were the first people to leave Uganda and moved towards Sakwa and settled in to present to us the Joka-jok? Yes M*******?

M******: Ramogi Hills, which is in the present Siaya district. After they settled there, two of the Jok sons decided to part with the clan itself and they moved towards southern Nyanza in Sakwa, Alego and those other parts and then his migration was fuelled by internal conflicts.

Teacher: Thank you M******, clap for her (learners clap for the learner who has just presented). As simple as that we see the people who are related to jok, they moved out of Uganda as we said Uganda is the second dispersal point of the Kenyan Luo in a place called Pabungu Pakwach. From there they moved East wards direction towards Ramogi Hills and this one is situated in Siaya district and we can say that one might have taken place from around sixteenth century. Out of this major group of Jok, there were internal conflicts and two of his sons decided to part ways and they moved into different directions into southern Nyanza into what we call the Winam Gulf and by the end of this lesson we are going to draw the map in page forty eight in the Explorer Book. Draw the map now. From the Winam gulf they moved to Karachuonyo and Wanyane clans from there they moved to Sakwa, Alego, Asembo and other parts of Nyanza. Let us see another presentation from somebody else. Yes W*****, Joka Owiny just from where you are?

W*****: They were the second wave of the Kenyan Luo. They came with Owiny and settled in Alego in early seventeenth century. Owiny was a great leader and his people who were called Joka-ruoth and Joka-sigoma settled in Nyakach.

Teacher: Yes that is a good presentation. Clap for her. (Learners clap for her) They were related to Jopadhola, came from the northern part of Uganda and settled in Sigoma in Alego. In your book it is written Sogoma, I think that was a mistake, it should be Sigoma in Alego and they arrived around seventeenth century. They came a bit later and Owiny himself was a great fighter. He fought with the other group of the Jopadhola and that is why he was given the title called Ruoth the leader. Ruoth is a title of a great leader and his people are now called the Joka-Ruoth because they were led by Ruoth - a leader. They settled in Kisumu, Nyakach and south Nyanza. Let us move to Joka-omolo.

Another group the Joka-omolo, who will present this one? Yes, we can hear you from the back.

Learner: The Joka-omolo moved from northern Bunyoro to Ibanda and Bikoho and then they later moved to Ugenya. They encountered the Abagussi and Abagoli and eh whom they pushed out of aah to Yimbo. They spread and some of them moved down to south Nyanza.

Teacher: Yes that was a good presentation, please clap for her. (Learners clap for her).

This famous group of Joka-omolo. They also came from northern Bunyoro, which was a famous kingdom in Uganda. The Bunyoro and Buganda Kingdom were the two famous kingdoms in

223

Uganda before and during the colonial times. Even before the coming of the colonizers in Africa. Actually they were great rivals; they were fighting for supremacy and most of the time they were at war. So when we now see the Joka-omolo moving from Bunyoro, first of all they settled in that place called Ibanda is a small region in Nyanza and then another place called Bikoho. Those are temporary areas where they settled first and finally went to Ugenya and gem all these are regions found in Nyanza province. And on the process of their movement they came across one of the Bantu groups called the Abagussi and pushed them out of Yimbo, which is another region in Nyanza province. During this period the majority of them had moved into South Nyanza. We can now say that we have Joka-omolo in South Nyanza. Finally we can talk about the Luo Abasuba. Yes, M*** A**?

M*** A**: The Luo Abasuba are of Bantu origin. They are a mixture of Bantu from Uganda who intermarried with the Luo and settled around Lake Victoria in the Highlands of Rusisnga as well as Gwasi area.

Teacher: Good, and give her a good clap. (Learners clap).

Here we have important points worth noting about the Luo Abasuba. The first point worth noting is that they were a mixture of the Bantu who were from Uganda and the Luos. They intermarried because there was cultural interaction. Yes, the cultures were interacting.

By the way in what ways were cultures interacting before the coming of Europeans? They came into contact, what ways did they interact? Does it mean that if they were Bantus they were living as Bantus alone, if they were Nilotes they were living on their own or did they interact? No they were coming into contact in one way or the other so which are these ways that the cultures were constantly coming into contact?

Learner: Through intermarriages.

Teacher: Yes, you do not just marry somebody when you do not come into contact with them. Another way? Yes N******?

N******: They were barter trading.

Teacher: Good, which other way?

Learner: during raiding.

Teacher: Yes, during raiding. Where do we hear of cattle rustling in Kenya?

Learner: North Eastern and Eastern provinces.

Teacher: Yes most of these communities believe they should have as much cattle as possible because cattle is a form of prestige; whenever they see an animal they believe it belongs to them.

224

This is a problem which started long time ago and it is still here in the twenty first century. How can we solve this problem of cattle rustling? Very briefly, how can we solve it, yes J**?

J**: By giving or distributing animals to people.

Teacher: How else, what else can we do?

Learner: Increase security.

Teacher: Yes we intensify the security in the country. What else?

Learner: Maybe teach rustlers other methods of survival maybe get out of the tradition and engage into planting.

Teacher: Yes, can enable the people to shift their practices. We can engage them in other activities. The government can also dig boreholes because the other problem is water. And we also open market for their animals. We intensify the security and encourage trade. That is another method - through raid. So far we have looked and named intermarriages, trade, raid and what else? Yes?

Learner: Moving or looking to their neighbours for food.

Teacher: What else? Yes does that mean that they were not moving during ceremonies like burial, weddings, circumcision? All those are the traditional ways, which were making people to interact. We now see the Bantus coming into contact with the Luos and they intermarried and this led to the group called Abasuba. Yes Abasuba and they settled around Lake Victoria. It seems now that most of the Luo people were moving along or around water. Water is life and the Luo people were so much affiliated to the water bodies simply because they were fishermen. Yes what else?

Learner: Some of them were pastoralist and were looking for water for their animals.

Learner: It is an archaeological site.

Teacher: Yes that is one reason, what else? W*****?

W*****: That is where Tom Mboya was born and buried.

Teacher: That is a very good historian, repeat for them (Learner repeats her answer).

Teacher: Clap for her (Learners clap for her). Who was Tom Mboya?

Learner: He was a freedom fighter.

Teacher: In one way or the other, yes he was a freedom fighter.

225

Learner: He fought for the right of workers.

Teacher: Good, clap for her. He was what we call the union trade union leader to fight for the right of workers, who is currently the leader of trade union - COTU? Yes Angela?

Angela: Francis Atwoli (Learners clap).

Teacher: I keep on saying we cannot ignore current affairs programme and I think it’ s a high time we start what we can call a Current Affairs Club in the school (Bell rings).

Go to page forty-eight of the explorer history and government book one and draw the map, which traces the movement of the river-lake Nilotes. Apart from that I would like you to read about the effects of the Luo migration in Kenya over the weekend in preparation of the first test which might be done by the end of the week.

(The teacher then leaves class).

Date: 13/06/2006

PBBW

TIME: 2.40 – 3.20 PM.

NUMBER OF STUDENTS: 50

CLASS: FORM 1A

Students were all seated in rows facing the chalkboard. The lesson began with the teachers remarking to the researcher:

Teacher: (talking to researcher) Before you came we looked at the effects of the Bantu migration. So can we remind ourselves of some of the effects of the Bantu migration. Yes .. (turns attention to the class).

Teacher: Yes, the Bantu were engaged in iron working so when they moved from one place to another they spread the skill to the other people. Any other effects? Yes.

Learner: It led to intermarriages.

Teacher: Yes it led to intermarriages, the Bantu married the Nilotes and they also married some Cushites. Any other effects?

226

Learner: It led to an exchange of agricultural practices.

Teacher: Yes.

Learner: It led to population increase.

Teacher: Yes it led to population increase in the places that they settled in because when they moved to those places there were also people in those areas. Yes?

Learner: It also led to community conflicts.

Learner: Dorobo.

Teacher: Yes, they fought some Cushites like the Dorobo. In some cases they defeated them and in some cases they were defeated...

Who are the Cushitic speakers? The Cushites are people who speak closely related languages and where did they come from? Where did the Cushites come from?

Learner: Horn of Africa.

Teacher: Yes and where did the others come from?

Learner: South East Ethiopia.

Teacher: Yah, the horn of Africa and South East Ethiopia. So, where did these people trace their origin? Where is their original homeland?

Learner: It is found in North East Africa.

Teacher: The Cushites are divided into two main groups.

Learner: Southern and eastern Cushites.

227

Teacher: [writes southern “Cushites” on the board] so we said that there are eastern and southern Cushites and it appears that the southern Cushites arrived in Kenya earlier than the eastern Cushites. So these groups moved from southern Ethiopia highlands. They moved from southern highlands and by the end of the nineteenth century it is said that they were completely absorbed by the Bantus. What does this mean? We said that when somebody is absorbed then what happens?

Learner: They are assimilated.

Teacher: Yes, but what do you mean by assimilation? What happens to somebody who is assimilated or absorbed? Yes.

Learner: You do what they do.

Learner: Kenyan highlands.

Teacher: Yes they settled in Kenyan highlands and where did others settle?

Learner: Plains.

Teacher: Yes some settled in the plains (writes on board) some did not settle in Kenya, where did the others settle?

Learner: Northern Tanzania.

Learner: The Daholo.

Teacher: (Writes on board) Yes these were the Daholo.

Teacher: Yes where are these people found?

Learner: Along River Tana.

Teacher: That is all about the group – yes ... (Student interrupts).

Learner: There is also another group.

Teacher: Yes which one is this?

228

Learner: I didn’t get the name (other students disagree with him).

Teacher: Where did you get this information?

Learner: G.H.C.BOOK primary seven.

Learner: Randile

Teacher: Randile or Rendile? How do you pronounce it? Yes ... (the teacher writes names on the board as learners say them out). Who are they? (learners respond....)

Learner: In Arabia.

Teacher: Yes they migrated from Arabia and when did they migrate from Arabia?

Learner: In one thousand B.C.

Teacher: Yah, they settled in the horn of Africa after migrating from Arabia in the year one thousand B.C. They migrated southwards into the modern area of Somali and then settled in the northern borders of Kenya in the first millennium....

Teacher: Yes a thosuand years. Yes when the Rendile came to Kenya where did they settle?

Learner: In the eastern part of Lake Turkana.

Teacher: Aaah, which part aaah which part?

Learner: Western part of Lake Turkana.

Teacher: Do we have anybody who is a Rendile here? Who is a Rendile?

(A student raises his hands he says his mother is from the Rendile but the father is a Kissi).

Teacher: So you are not a Rendile you are Kissi.

Teacher: Where did the Oromo and Somali settle?

Learner: Shores of Lake Turkana.

Teacher: Do we have any Turkana? (Class- no one) Who has ever been to Lake Turkana? (A learner raises his hand.) Have you seen the lake?

229

Learner: Yes.

Teacher: How big is it?

Learner: It is big but I can’t say how much.

Learner: They were looking for better pasture.

Teacher: Yes the Oromo moved southwards in search of pasture and when did they arrive in Kenya?

Learner: In the 16th century.

Teacher: Yes, the Oromo arrived in Kenya in the sixteenth century (writes on board). When they attempted to move eastwards they were stopped by a certain group. Which group stopped their movement eastwards?

Learner: The Somali.

Teacher: When they reached the coast, they came into contact with another group. Which group was it- I mean at the coast?

Learner: The Miji Kenda.

Learner: Intermarried?

Teacher: No before that?

Learner: They fought the Bantu.

Teacher: Yes, the Oromo were very strong. They defeated the Bantu and were able to settle in that particular place. The Oromo are known to be very aggressive. Do we have any Oromo here? (No response from the class) The conflicts between the Oromo and the Somali continued until the beginning of the 20th century. Do they still have conflicts? Well, it is said that the conflict between them were settled and they now live in their present homeland. Let us look at the reasons for the migration of the eastern Cushites. (Teacher writes on the board).

Teacher: Reasons for the migration of the Eastern Cushites. Why did they move from their original home? 230

Learner: They were escaping from clan and family feuds. (Teacher writes on the board)....

(Teacher writes learners’ response on the board)

Learner: The Somali.

Teacher: ... . So we have looked at the examples of the Oromo, Borana, and Somali, so since we have run short of time, I would like you to divide yourselves into groups, actually the very groups you were in, so the first group you look at the Oromo, the next and plus these two (asks one learner- are you in the group?) Okay the four of you will look at the Borana, then from Okello up to Olango you will look at the Somali and then from there we move to which group? Aaah the next group you look at River-Lake Nilotes. You will look at the Joka Jok then this group will look at the Joka Owiny then the next group will look at the Joka Omolo and the next Luo Abasuba. There is a group, which is left without an assignment. As the last group look at the Nandi. And then who would like to tell us about the Kipsigis? Do we have anybody who is a kipsigis? Let somebody volunteer, who would like to tell us about the Kipsigis? (A learner volunteers). Yes thank you - you will tell us about the Kipsigis in next time. (The bell rings and the learners leave the classroom for the next lesson).

231

Date: 05/07/2006

PBBD

Lesson 1

TIME: 8.45 – 9.25 AM.

NUMBER OF STUDENTS: 52

CLASS: FORM 1A

Teacher: Now we continue, we were talking about effects of Luo migration in Kenya and we have said that their migration led to population increase in Ethiopia and assimilation of other communities. Other communities like, yes?

Learner: Luyhia.

Teacher: Yes we are given the Luhyias as an example. Another effect, yes?

Learner: Trading activities increased with their arrival, they traded their products with their neighbours the Gussii (teacher writes this on the board).

Teacher : Increased trading activities between the Luo and other communities. What were the Luos giving their neighbours?

Learner: Livestock products.

Teacher: Yes they gave the communities they interacted with livestock products and the other communities would give them agricultural products. Another effect?

Learner: The interactions led to intermarriages.

Teacher: Really?

Learner: Yes.

Teacher: Example?

Learner: Between the Luos and western Bantu.

Teacher: Who were these western Bantu?

Learner: The Luo Abasuba resulted as intermarriage between Luos and Bantus.

Teacher: What else? What was the other result? (Teacher writes ‘the intermarriage’ on the board).

Learner: Their contact with the Bantu led to the adoption of agriculture.

232

Teacher: Yes when they interacted with the Bantus who were agriculturalists they adopted this alongside pastoralism. The Luo continued moving but were stopped what stopped them? They would have continued but they were stopped, what stopped them?

Learner: The Europeans.

Teacher: When was this?

Learner: Nineteenth century they were colonised.

Teacher: That leads to the end of the river-lake Nilotes, their migration and settlement. Let us look at the plain Nilotes. (Teacher writes ‘the plain Nilotes’ on the board). This group includes such people as (learners raise their hands). Yes one at a time yes.

Learner: Masai.

Learner: Samburu.

Learner: Iteso.

Learner: Njemps.

Learner: Karamojong.

Teacher: Are they also included in this group?

Learner: Teacher, they are Nilotes.

Teacher: Are they Kenyans? We are only dealing with Kenyans. (At this point the learners start to argue. Some say that the Karamojong are not Kenyans, while some say that they are found at the border of Kenya and some say that they are found in the three countries, Kenya, Uganda and Tanzania).

Learner: Yes they are found both in Kenya and Uganda and even in Tanzania.

Teacher: The Maasai is the major group and they are referred to as the ‘maa speaking’. They are people who speak closely related languages When did they arrive in Kenya?

Learner: In one thousand AD.

Teacher: Where did they come from? What was their home?

Learner: Area north of Lake Turkana.

Teacher: Why did they move? What is the main reason for their movement?

Learner: They were pastoralists so they needed pasture for their animals.

233

Teacher: Yes they needed fresh grazing land and water for their herds. Besides that, what other factors made them to migrate? If you have answered a question put down your hand so that I can pick those who have not talked.

Learner: Diseases and epidemics.

Learner: They migrated to escape from external attacks.

Teacher: Okay They may have moved also to escape from external attacks, external attacks from who?

Learner: Neighbours.

Teacher: Okay From those people who they were interacting with, from their neighbouring communities. They escaped attacks from these people. If there was no, in any case, they were not settling anywhere they were nomadic pastoralists. So they easily moved from one place to another. Another factor, I hope you have all these points in your books (Learners say ‘yes’). Just say ‘yes’, the day I will check and I find out that you do not have them! Okay Another factor?

Learner: Drought and famine.

Teacher: Yes this is another factor that made them to move. So that if for example famine and drought occurred where they were settled they could easily move out, remember we have said that being pastoralists they did not have permanent settlement. It was just a matter of shifting their manyattas from one place to the other. Another factor?

Learner: Population pressure in their cradle land.

Teacher: This may also have caused them to move they kept on moving to less populated areas. Another factor?

Learner: Internal feuds in clans and families.

Teacher: Whenever they had their own internal feuds among brothers they would want to move away.

Learner: They migrated due to spirit of adventure.

Teacher: Yes there were those who had the spirit of adventure and they were moving in one direction from their original home, we said their original home was which one?

234

Learner: North of Turkana.

Teacher: Yes from north of Lake Turkana they kept on moving southwards and it is this group that settled in Moroto that other plain Nilotes emerged like which ones?

Teacher: Yes they kept on moving southwards and finally they settled in Uganda in Mount Moroto in the eastern Uganda around one thousand A.D. And it is from this group that other plain Nilotes groups emerged, what groups were these?

Learner: Karamojong.

Teacher: Others?

Learner: Iteso.

Learner: Jie.

Teacher: Where are they found?

Learner: Uganda.

Teacher: Another group?

Learner: Turkana.

Teacher: Do we have any Turkanas in Uganda?

Learner: I’m not sure but Karamojong are mainly in Uganda.

Teacher: Now the Teso, where did the Teso settle?

Learner: In Uganda about seventeenth century.

Teacher: They did not rest there, they continued to expand such that the beginning of the nineteenth century where had they settled and when did they settle by the end of the eighteenth century?

Learner: Western Kenya.

Teacher: What happened?

Learner: They were pushed out by the Bantu southwards.

Teacher: The Turkana of Kenya where did they come from?

Learner: Mount Moroto in Uganda.

Teacher: Yes, both in Kenya and Uganda. They are still pastoralists so still move in both Kenya and Uganda. So that is basically about the plain Nilotes. Let us look at the Maasai, they are closely associated with the original Kalenjin-speaking communities and what is their original home?

Learner: North of Lake Turkana.

235

Learner: Eighteen hundred.

Teacher: They moved around eighteen hundred and they moved southwards. Now where did they pass?

Learner: Southwards from Mount Elgon.

Teacher: Where is Mt Elgon?

Learner: Border of Kenya and Uganda.

Teacher: This was a slow and gradual movement, by the way migrations were slow, in any case they were moving with large herds which made the movement slow because they grazed, they grazed the animals as they moved. This southwards movement took them as far as where?

Learner: Uasin Gishu.

Teacher: But they did not stop there they continued to move until they reached where?

Learner: Moved until they reached Tanzania.

Teacher: As they moved who did they interact with?

Learner: Sirikwa people.

Teacher: Yes they interacted and throughout the eighteenth century they could be found throughout East Africa especially in the Rift Valley, and as they moved would fight anybody who showed resistance. Which communities were these?

Learners: (shouting out the names of the communities): Kalenjins, Akamba, Abagusi.

Teacher: Around eighteen fifty the Maasai started to experience problems, which were these? (Teacher writes on the board problems that faced the Maasai).

Learner: Drought.

Teacher: It means it affected pasture and animals.

Learner: Diseases like smallpox, cholera and rinderpest.

Teacher: Were these human or animal diseases?

Learner: Both human and animal.

Teacher: Another problem?

236

Learner: Internal conflicts between the Kwavi who were agriculturalist and the Purko who were pastoralists.

Teacher: Another one?

Learner: The wars they fought with the Kikuyus.

Learner: External conflicts were also between the Maasai and the Kamba.

Teacher: These were external conflicts what else?

Learner: Succession disputes.

Teacher: Following the death of their father, Sendenyo and Lenana had differences between them that led to the division of the Maasai community.

Learner: British rule.

Teacher: Really? The British never bothered the Maasai, they were friends.

Learner: The Nandi power.

Teacher: Yes the Nandi were growing as a power and this affected the Maasai.

Note these points down. Any question? (Lesson ends)

Lesson 2

TIME: 3.55 – 4.35 PM.

NUMBER OF STUDENTS: 50

CLASS: FORM 1B

Teacher: Good afternoon class. What was your home-work?

Learner: Today we are going to look at the Nilotic speakers, these are the river-lake Nilotes and these are basically the Luos in Kenya and then, they are divided into four groups according to the way they arrived in Kenya. These are the Joka-Jok, the Joka-Owiny, the Joka-Omolo and the Abasuba. Okay. The river lake Nilotes – oh sorry. Okay. The Joka – Jok stand for the people of Jok and Jo means people, Ka means of so Joka means the people of so Joka Jok means the people of Jok. So they were the first ones to move out of Uganda and settled in the Ramogi hills and also they settled in Siaya district in Nyanza province. Aaa later on, when they had settled, two of Jok sons aaa mmm moved to South Nyanza to Winam Gulf to form the Karachuonyo and the

237

Wanchare clans and Karachuonyo is found in South Nyanza. So they went then and then they spread to other places like Sakwa, Alego, Asembo and other parts of Nyanza. Okay. Their migration was fuelled by internal conflicts …

Teacher (interrupting): what does the word Jok mean?

Learner: … Jok means okay, Joka means people of and so Joka-Jok means people of Jok.

Teacher: Joka Owiny means the people of (class responds: Owiny).

Teacher: Joka Omolo – (class:) people of Omolo.

Teacher: Ruoth?

Learner: Yes Ruoth.

Teacher: Jaduong then means what?

Learner: The big one, that Jaduong is the big one and Ruoth is the leader, so like Mercy our class captain is our leader (Class laughs. So we can refer to her as Ruoth). And his name might be the place named Owiny Sigoma so when they settled in Sigoma they changed the name of that place to be Owiny Sigoma and his people were also referred to as Joka Ruoth meaning?

Class: People of Ruoth.

Learner: Yes, the people of the leader. Okay. They settled in Kisumu, Nyakach and South Nyanza. And yah okay that is about Joka Owiny. So we go to Joka Omolo who are the people of …

Class responds: Omolo.

O.k. After that we go to the Abasuba. Okay. We know that the Abasuba were Bantus, were Bantus but okay. They migrated when the Bantu refugees migrated and came to Kenya, they found the Luo then they interacted and married so they became a group of River-lake Nilotes.

Teacher: But do we still have the Abasuba? 238

Learner: Okay. They they …

Teacher: Or they have been absorbed by the Luo?

Learner: Yes, they have been absorbed by the Luo. Nearly everything that they do is like the Luos.

Teacher: Their names, the way they talk?

Learner: Yes. Bantu refugees, these are the Abasuba who moved from Uganda. Okay. They intermarried with the Luos. As I had said, then they settled in Lake Victoria islands which are Mfungamano and Rusinga. They also settled in Gwasi area. Okay. Now we will go to the effects. Okay does anybody have any questions?

Teacher: Are these people Kenyans?

Learner: Yes, they are Kenyans.

Teacher: But you said they came from Uganda so are they Ugandans or Kenyans?

Learner: We have been tracing their movement from where they came from before they finally settled in Kenya.

Teacher: So what makes them Kenyans?

Learner: The fact that they moved here long ago and settled.

Teacher: So are you saying that you are both a Kenyan and a Luo?

Learner: Yes, we are Luos and we are also Kenyans. Luo is our tribe, our ethnic community but as a Kenyan we are part of a broader society.

Teacher: Yes, so you are saying that communities interacted and became more of one big society than the divided groups?

Learner: Yes.

239

Teacher: That is what we want to find out. Who are you? Are you a Kenyan or are you a Kikuyu or a Luo?

Learner: I think we are both.

Learner: Being Kenyan means all these things. You cannot just be Kenyan without belonging to a particular community. That is what makes Kenya. Without these communities we would not have Kenya.

Teacher: So what are you saying?

Learner: That we are Kenyans and we are also from different communities.

Learner: I don’t think it matters any more. I think long time ago it was important but now times have changed and people just call themselves Kenyans.

Learner: Teacher, look at the International competitions, nobody says that so and so is from the Kalenjin community, they say Kenyan. We are recognized by our country and not ethnic background.

Date: 12/07/2006

PGDW2

TIME: 2.25 – 3.05 PM.

NUMBER OF STUDENTS: 54

CLASS: FORM 1C

240

Teacher: We have looked at the people of Kenya and we need to look at the Portuguese but today we are going to revise. Remove your question papers you all have your papers with you. The people of Kenya we are going to look at the maybe from Friday. You all have your papers, I’m going to give you the answers and then if you have a question it will be the normal way you raise your hand and then it will be clarified. So Question One was, give three challenges faced by archaeologists for using radiocarbon technology in their discovery. What is radiocarbon? (Teacher writes ‘uses of radio carbon’ on the board).

Learner: It is a method of dating fossils.

Teacher: Radiocarbon is a method of dating fossils. Radiocarbon is not the source of history and government. Radiocarbon does not mean that it is the same as archaeology; it is not, it is a method of dating fossils. Do we have other methods?

Learner: Geological.

Learner: Statistical.

Learner: Stratographical.

Learner: Chemical.

Teacher: This is where we have carbon dating and the use of potassium.

Learner: Vision track dating.

Teacher: We also have vision tracking as a method and I wanted only one and you give the challenges. The question is asking for three methods. Scientifically it is that when dead they release odour that is carbon and this depends on the length or period. Ask your chemistry teacher about this. It is supposed to be fourteen atomic so that the odour from the objects produces the red carbon. Point number one was carbon fossils it is only used on fossils-carbon fourteen is only used on fossils and not artefacts. What is the difference?

Learner: Fossils are remains of animals and artefacts are remains of equipment.

Teacher: No you know why you did not get it, let me first of all get the answer and then I will tell you why. Yes.

Learner: Fossils are remains of living organisms and artefacts are remains of things made by man.

Teacher: You gave me examples of fossils instead of the answer. Fossils are remains of humans and plants and animals but artefacts are remains of equipments or things made by man. We are talking of pottery for example; we are talking about garments, whether the clothes are made from animal skins but when you talk of skin you will be referring to a fossil and not an artefact but if

241 you are talking about beads, that is actually an artefact in fact even if we are talking about settlement included places, weapons, that is an artefact and the question needs you to state their discoveries. So when they are using carbon fourteen they cannot detect the artefacts but can use it on fossils because the fossils are the ones which have carbon. Radiocarbon only gives approximate date. You do not get exact dates but that does not mean it is in correct but just inaccurate. For example we say that the Turkana boy was about six to ten years old, do you remember, he was about seven years old, meaning that they could not establish if he is exactly seven but minus or plus and this was used through carbon fourteen.

The other point is that the method is only suitable for dating objects less than fifty thousand years old because carbon keeps being released which means that by the end of that period fifty thousand there will be no carbon, you cannot be able to use the method carbon dating. Yes

Learner: My book says forty thousand.

Teacher: The book has given forty thousand and I have fifty thousand years, I will check on other texts then we will agree, you also have forty thousand? (The teacher then gets to hear from those students who had different dates from hers).

We talked of archaeology as a source of history but not a method. In archaeology we cannot talk about the culture. Do not give general points.

Learner: Teacher, you told us that archaeology is a method used in collecting information?

Teacher: No it is not a method, we talked of archaeology as a source of history and we said that with archaeology we have few archaeologists in the country, did we say that? (

Learners: Yes.

Teacher: Yes and we said that even equipments with archaeological discoveries we need equipments which we do not have in Kenya but remember, the question does not talk about Kenya. The question is ‘what are the challenges facing archaeologists?’ not ‘what challenges do archaeologists in Kenya face?’, we are not asked about a specific country or even if it is in the developed country.

Learner: What if one says that the carbon fourteen evaporates into the atmosphere?

Teacher: Why does it go into the atmosphere, it is because it is old and how old?

Learner: What about it does not deal with animals but only human beings.

Teacher: No fossils also include remains of animals and that is why we approximate. For example, an average Kenyan lives for forty five years so to get the date we look at the approximate lifespan and then we approximate the dates. Any more clarification?

242

But we are not talking about archaeology we are looking at the challenges of carbon dating method but what you are saying is a disadvantage of using archaeology. We have talked about the methods but now we are looking at the challenges, what are the challenges? Let us move to Question Two. Identify and describe the two theories that explain the origin of agriculture. There are two theories: The diffusion theory, it states that agriculture started in one area and then spread to other areas. The area suggested is south west Asia and this refers to Mesopotamia then the independent theory suggest that different areas started developing agriculture independently without any influence from other areas, that is why we say that agriculture developed in various river valleys. Those are the two theories you first identify and then describe. Any question? You cannot explain what you have not identified. Any question?

Learner: I want to answer Number Three.

Teacher: Question Two, you are all okay?

Learners: Yes.

Learner: What if you write independent theory states that agriculture started independently?

Teacher: But you do not use the same word to define you are not explaining anything. For example, if I ask you to define the word ‘government’ and you say ‘government is a government’, you cannot use the same word to define. Question Three. In which four ways did river Nile contributed to the growth of agriculture amongst ancient Egyptians?

Learner: Water for irrigation.

Teacher: Point 1, River Nile provided water for irrigation.

Learner: Flooded annually depositing fertile silt.

Teacher: Yes river Nile flooded annually depositing silt at the banks making the areas fertile. Point number 3?

Learner: The delta provided security.

Teacher: That point must be explained well, the point the Nile delta had a sanctuary to the north and the south provided shelter to the farmers. Point number 4?

Learner: River Nile was used for transporting farm produce.

Teacher: Yes, river Nile was used for transporting farm produce that is a good point. Another point was that the Nile provided water for irrigation to the farmers.

Learner: What if you said that the Nile brought fertile soils from Ethiopian highlands?

243

Teacher: But it is not the Nile that brings soil from the Ethiopian highland but the heavy rains, what comes first, the flooding or the heavy rain? It is not the Nile that brings the heavy rain it is the flooding.

Learner: What if I wrote it carried water for irrigation?

Teacher: What carried water for irrigation? You must mention the river Nile.

Learner: I was referring to the river Nile.

Teacher: How do I know, it is correct but you did not mention the Nile. Any more questions? Question 4, this one I apologise, it was a dry question. Those who wrote Four, you managed to get the ten points most of you, you confused the two, in History if you have a question asking you to explain the effects of early agriculture amongst the Sumerians and one of the effects is saying that it led to the growth urban areas you must give the examples of these urban areas but if you give examples of urban centres that are not in Mesopotamia then the whole answer is wrong, you get no mark because you are contradicting history. (Teacher writes the names on the board).

In Egypt: Memphis, Aswan, Thebes, Akhabetan. In Mesopotamia, Lur, Babylon, Kish Nippur (You must write correct spellings).

Question Five reads: Give six common features of early agriculture in Egypt and Mesopotamia. This one you must compare the two areas. Therefore your answer must show that you are comparing the two areas not one area. Yes?

Learner: In both areas, the farmers used primitive or traditional farm implements.

Teacher: Yes in both areas, farmers used traditional methods, can you give examples? You could even talk of primitive farm implements, e.g. we are talking of wooden hoes; we are talking of digging sticks. The second point, anybody to give us the second point?

Learner: Both relied on river waters for their agricultural activities, e.g. Egyptians the river Nile and the Mesopotamians’ rivers Euphrates and Tigris.

Teacher: We are not looking at reasons for agriculture but …

Learner: Both engaged in trade from their surplus for other commodities.

Teacher: Another point?

Learner: In both regions human and animal labour were used in the farms.

Learner: Both used irrigation methods were developed.

Learner: they were characterised by indigenous animals and crops, e.g. wheat, barley and cattle.

Learner: Mixed farming.

244

Teacher: That is just too general. In both areas a system of food preservation was developed, e.g., pots in Mesopotamia and granaries in Egypt.

In both regions there was subsistence farming. I must be able to start to make you better historians. I will not be in so I will give you work for the next lesson. Do not make noise.

(End of lesson).

Date: 19/07/2006

PGBS1

TIME: 2.40 – 3.20 PM.

NUMBER OF STUDENTS: 54

CLASS: FORM 1D

Teacher: We looked at the Portuguese conquest then now we want to look at the Portuguese rule, how it was like and then move on and look at the impact of the Portuguese rule. So what we are looking at today is the Portuguese rule. (Teacher writes ‘Portuguese Rule’ on the board, the learners murmur). We want to see what characterised Portuguese rule, were they good? Were they bad? Were they better than the Arabs? I remember having said that they were brutal. (Teacher writes ‘brutal’ on the board). A brutal person is someone who is merciless, does not have feelings, and this brutality was as a result of the attitude that they had towards the Africans, why? You are inferior to us so we do not care how we treat you and slavery was still continuing. These Africans were flogged in public when they did not pay their taxes.

Secondly, they raped the African women (teacher writes ‘raped African women’ on the board). This was an insult to the African men. It was like they could not defend their women yet in the African context a man is supposed to protect the woman, even when they are walking together the man walks ahead and the woman behind because he needs to protect the woman. He makes sure that nothing happens or harms her. But now they were in a position where their wives were being raped and they could not protect them.

Apart from that these people were also racists. They practiced racial discrimination (Teacher writes ‘racist-practiced racial discrimination’ on the board). They saw their colour as superior; they never shared their churches with the Africans yet they wanted Africans to be converted to Christianity. This was impossible if you want to covert somebody you must first of all make them be a part of your system, you must show them what you do, tell them this is what I eat and so on and let them 245 make up their mind if they want to become part of you or not but when you keep them away from you but expect them to practice what you do then you will not be able to influence them or convince them otherwise. Due to racial discrimination the Portuguese treated the Africans as inferior, something that the Africans did not like after all they had helped the Portuguese to conquer the Arabs so they did not understand why they were being treated differently after all that.

Apart from that the Portuguese were insufficient. (Teacher writes ‘insufficient’ on the board). When they took over the East African coast that is from Somali up to Mozambique, they never bothered to go into the interior, they were only interested in areas where there was gold trade and even when they taxed people the money they received they misused, they mismanaged it to the point that they started over-taxing the traders. For example, in our own country, in Kenya, the investors are running away because of the high taxes that we charge and instead they are opting for Uganda and Tanzania, therefore as the investors run away we suffer because we end up unemployed, the crime rates go up, poverty levels also rise up. That was the kind of thing that Portuguese practiced at the East African coast, so the traders opted to go elsewhere and trade.

The other thing that also characterised the Portuguese rule was lack of interest. (Teacher writes ‘lack of interest’ on the board). There were areas they had conquered but were not interested so this led to many revolts in Mombasa, Pate, Lamu and from the African communities in the interior. These revolts led to the decline of the economy. I will give you an example. Let us take as an example when there is a riot in town shops close down and business then is low sindiyo? (Learners respond ‘yah’).

The Portuguese had their viceroy who was based in Goa and the rest were just representatives who had limited powers. So this is what characterised the Portuguese rule and with this kind of negative impact the result was the occurrence of a lot of revolts.

Now let us look at the next topic, which is The Decline of the Portuguese Rule. (Teacher writes decline of the Portuguese on the board).

The first point will be the treatment of the Africans (Teacher writes treatment of the Africans on board). Have you met a Nigerian? (Learners shout ‘Yes’), they are very proud people Ama? (Learners shout ‘Yes’). That is how Africans were. A true African behaves like a Nigerian. They say that Luos are proud “it is our nature what do you say”. The African man the ego is all they had. Look at the Bantus, look at the Mji Kenda, they go through initiation and maybe they are junior elders, some are senior elders and then they get mistreated in public. They would use the sorcerers against the Portuguese because of the way they were treated.

The second point is the brutality, (Teacher writes ‘brutality’ on the board). The brutality was not only to Africans but also to the Arabs. They treated them badly yet Arabs felt that they were at the same level with the Portuguese. The Portuguese discriminated against them yet they used them to

246 rule the coast. The third point, the rise and rivalry of other powers, (Teacher writes ‘rise of other powers like the Dutch, British and the French’ on the board). The rise and rivalry of other powers like the British, the Dutch and the French these people were much more developed than the Portuguese, the Portuguese did not march their powers. There was also the annexation of Portugal by Spain. Who doesn’t know where Spain is? Who is the captain of the Spanish team? (Learners shout out footballers’ names and the different football teams from Spain). (Open map of Europe, look at Spain and Portugal. Learners look at the maps). Which one is bigger? (Learners shout ‘Spain’). It fell under the control of Spain in sixteen forty. The Portuguese were under the Spanish rule until sixteen seventy five. This means that all that time they were not in control of the East African Coast and so it was not easy to get their control back. Portugal is also a very small country and getting reinforcement was not easy. So the next point is the size of Portugal. (Teacher writes ‘size of Portugal’ on board). the next point is that distant from Portugal to the East African coast was too far. Distant was also a problem and the reinforcement was very few not a match to the Spanish. Now those were the reasons that led to the decline of the Portuguese control in the East African coast.

Learner: I wanted to ask who built Fort Jesus?

Teacher: The Portuguese.

Learner: Why?

Teacher: To protect themselves, for security reasons and administrative purposes. They had their offices there, haven’t you been to Fort Jesus? (Learners say yes some no).

Teacher: Any other question?

Learner: Is there a possibility that they can renovate Fort Jesus?

Teacher: Yes.

Learner: Why are they renovating it?

Teacher: It is now a tourist attraction ... must be renovated. Any other question?

Learner: When the Portuguese exploited the riches of the coast when they came to trade, can you say it affected their rule?

Teacher: No it is their bad manners for being inefficient. You know there are very many small countries but they are doing very well. Think of the Sultan of Brunei-Brunei is a very small country situated on South East Asia and very rich in oil. It all depends on how you manage your resources and your income. Look at Switzerland – map of Europe, it is small but very efficient and very rich. It all depends on how you manage your affairs.

Learner: If they did use it efficiently, would the Portuguese rule have lasted?

247

Teacher: Maybe if they maintained the trade, they would have of course flourished, Christianity would have flourished even more than Islam because people have seen the good things that the Portuguese did. In the next lesson we will continue to look at the impact of Portuguese rule and we will look specifically at both the negative and positive. (Bell rings).

Learner: If you get married to a Mzungu, the colour, does it come from the white people or the mum?

Teacher: You are asking me a biological question. That the colour does it come from the white person or the black? It depends on the genes, who is stronger, if your mother is powerful you will come up with black but the hair could be - look at Goye, the African side is very strong but her children may come out more with white features, so that will depend on the genes. Why are you asking this question? Tell us next time, otherwise please get ready for the next lesson (teacher leaves class and I say good-bye to the students and follow ...).

Date: 21/07/2006

PBDP

Lesson 1

TIME: 11.00 – 11.40 AM.

NUMBER OF STUDENTS: 42

CLASS: FORM 1B

(The teacher enters the class and there is a lot of noise from the students as they are settling down and this takes a while -3 minutes)

Teacher: So once again good morning.

Learners: Good morning Mr. *****.

Teacher: How was your weekend?

Learners: Fine, it was fine.

Teacher: Welcome back to school, aah and we are still continuing with our topic which we started last week in connection with The People of Kenya up to the Nineteenth Century and before we embark on our lesson this morning, I would like us to have a review of what we had covered last week in connection to the Bantu and I remember we concluded the Bantus by analysing the results

248 or effects of the Bantu migration. So this is the time now we are going to review for two or three minutes in connection with the effects or results of Bantu connection in our country. Yes, what were the main results or effects of Bantu migration in Kenya as a country?

W: The spread of iron-working.

Teacher: Yes ****

N: There was population increase.

Teacher: Yes****.

S: community conflicts.

Teacher: What might have caused the increase in inter-community conflict? S has just stated that there was inter-community conflict.

M: Different cultures and practices.

(Learner says something but not loud enough).

Teacher: Pardon?

Learner (repeats): Scramble for land? Small quantity of land?

Teacher: Why? What might have cause small quantity of land?

Learner: Population increase.

Teacher: Yes, population increase, that point is supported very clearly here there was shortage of land. What else? Yes from the back (referring to the learner seated at the back of the classroom).

Learner: Intermarriage between communities.

Teacher: Yah, intermarriages from different communities, very good, that means that there was clear interaction between communities, people were in good terms therefore they intermarried. Yes?

Learner: Trade.

Teacher: Trade increase because the Bantu were good farmers, the other communities who they came into contact with. What system were they using? What type of trade?

Learner: Barter trade.

Teacher: ***** What is barter trade?

249

A different student answers: Exchange of goods with other goods.

The learner that the teacher had asked initially then responds: Exchange of good with other goods.

Teacher: Those who were agriculturalists, we expect them to have a lot of agricultural products and those who were pastoralist had a lot of pastoralist goods and they were exchanging those items. We now move to the topic of discussion.

(The teacher moves towards the board and writes the title Nilotes on the board. Faces the learners and asks them the question ‘Who are the Nilotes?’ No response from the class though a lot of murmuring from the students).

J: River-lake Nilotes

Teacher: Another ****?

E.G: Plain Nilotes.

Teacher: Yes ****?

M: Highland Nilotes.

Teacher: If we can classify them in those three areas (teacher then writes ‘River lake Nilotes, plain Nilotes highland Nilotes’ on the board. The students are murmuring).

Teacher: How do we get to know about their migration? Where do we get the information from?

Learner: From archaeological evidence. (Teacher writes this on the board).

Teacher: From which other source?

Learner: From the anthropologists.

Teacher: Yes from the anthropologists ****.

K: Oral tradition.

Teacher: Yes ****?

H: (learner says something but not audible)

Teacher: Pardon?

H: Linguistics.

Teacher: Yes from linguistics. All these are sources of information; they give us information about the past events of man. We can therefore be able to know that the Nilotes originated from the

250 south west Ethiopia (teacher writes ‘south west Ethiopia’ on the board then talks to the students. We can put the point down that according to the archaeologists and other sources of historical information the Nilotes are believed to have believed to have originated from wouth West Ethiopian Highland. Ethiopia is a neighbouring country. We can call this a dispersal point of the Nilotes (teacher writes ‘dispersal point’ on the board). Therefore the region which is near Lake Turkana became a dispersal point of the Kenyan Nilotes.

Teacher: What do you understand of dispersal point?

Learner: Where they broke up into the three groups.

(Lesson ends)

Lesson 2

TIME: 3:55-4:35 PM

NUMBER OF STUDENTS: 42

FORM 1A

Teacher: Did we finish the effects of Bantu migration? And you have copied the notes?

Learner: Yes.

Teacher: Now let us move on to the Nilotes. The term Nilotes, what does it mean?

Learner: Nilotes is a word derived from the word Nile and it means the group of people whose origin is associated with people from River Nile.

Teacher: Yes the term Nile means that it is associated to the River Nile. Just as we learnt about the Bantu that they are those people who share the same dialect, same with the Nilotes. They originated from the River Nile and also the languages that they speak are related and are referred to as Nilotic speakers. O.K what do we know about these Nilotes compared to the Bantus, what do we know about the Nilotes?

Learner: They are the second largest group.

Teacher: Bantu are the largest in Africa.

Learner: In Kenya they are divided into three groups the plain Nilotes, the river-lake Nilotes and the highland Nilotes.

251

Teacher: First of all before we go into that like all the other communities where did the Nilotes originate from? Their original homeland.

Learner: Southern Sudan?

Teacher: The area known as….?

Learner: Nile Valley.

Teacher: Nile valley?

Learner: The myth.

Teacher: The myth says what?

Learner: Nile valley in southern Sudan.

Teacher: Okay. So they point to that as their area of origin and then we are told that these Nilotes are divided into three groups, which are these three groups? Yes you tell us one somebody else tells us the other one.

Learner: River-lake Nilotes.

Teacher: River-lake Nilotes in Kenya this group is represented by?

Learner: Luo.

Teacher: Okay the Luo of Kenya represents the river lake Nilotes. Other group of Nilotes?

Learner: The highland Nilotes.

Teacher: The highland Nilotes, really? Okay the highland Nilotes are there but can we have them in order, in order.

Learner: Plain Nilotes.

Teacher: The plain Nilotes in Kenya the group is represented by?

Learner: Maasai.

Learner: Turkana.

Learner: Samburu.

(Teacher writes these names on the board).

Teacher: Well represented in the class. Then we have the other group.

Learner: Highland Nilotes.

Teacher: In Kenya these are represented by who?

Learner: Kalenjin groups.

252

Teacher: These Kalenjin groups comprises of people such as who?

Learner: Pokot.

Teacher: Anybody else?

Learner: Tugen.

Learner: Marakwet.

Learner: Kipsigis.

Learner: Elgeyo.

Learner: Nandi.

Learner: Keiyo.

Learner: Saboat.

Teacher: Is it Saboat or Soboat?

Learner: Saboat (Teacher writes thee names on the board).

Learner: Tirik.

Teacher: where did you get that it is not in the book Evolving World. Those who wrote Tirik I didn’t give you marks because it is not in the book.

Any other which we have not mentioned? Any other? And if you are a Kalenjin you should be able to tell us, yes are you a Kalenjin?

Learner: Yes.

Teacher: Yes tell us what other group makes the Kalenjin?

Learner: Bogomet.

Teacher: Yes Bogomet is another one.

Learner: Question, in plain Nilotes you left out Jemps.

Teacher: In the plain Nilotes you think we left out some? Okay you are taking us back.

Learner: I also want to differentiate between the Tiriki and the Tereki.

Teacher: Yes what is the difference?

Learner: Tiriki and Tereki are different people. The Tiriki people are interaction intermarriage between the Luhya and the Luo and they are also referred to as the Abateriki but the Teriki are pure Kalenjin group.

Teacher: Are you talking of the Teriki or the Tiriki?

253

Learner: Teriki.

(Learners seem not to be sure about what he is saying. A lot of murmuring in class).

Teacher: Do we have any Kalenjin in this class? Are you a Kalenjin? We need somebody from the Kalenjin community to tell us if there are Terikis in their community. Okay go ahead and tell us.

Learner: I was saying the Tiriki and Tereki are different people, Tiriki are a group of people which came about due to the intermarriage between the Luos and the Luhya but Tereki is a pure Kalenjin group.

Teacher: Okay. Now we have heard of all the groups that comprise of the Kalenjin community who represent the highland Nilotes and then unlike the Bantus what is the major difference?

Learner: Nilotes were predominantly pastoralists while the Bantu were agriculturalists.

Teacher: Yes the Nilotes were predominantly pastoralists while the Bantus were predominantly agriculturalists. Okay. From there we are going to look at the other groups of the Nilotes starting with the river-lake Nilotes in Kenya. We have been told that they are represented by the Luo. Now these Luo speakers what was their origin?

Learner: They came from southern Sudan at a place called Bahr-el-Ghazal.

Teacher: They came from southern Sudan a place known as Bahr-el-Ghazal, so this was their original home and then from their Bahr-el-Ghazal they migrated. First of all why did they migrate? There are many reasons but what was the main one?

Learner: They were pastoralists so they were looking for land for pasture.

Teacher: Just like the nomadic communities that we have today who are always moving in search of pasture for their animals so even the Luos were on the move looking for pasture for their animals. Okay. Can we now consider all the reasons for the Luo migration? What other reasons made the Luo move from their original home in southern Sudan to Kenya?

Learner: There was population pressure.

Teacher: Population pressure means what?

Learner: They were many people in a small place so this made them uncomfortable so they had to move out to release pressure that they had on land and other natural resources.

Teacher: Yes they needed to move to release pressure, another reason?

Learner: Drought and famine forced them to move.

Teacher: Okay. That area where they initially settled was dry therefore they needed to move to other areas where they would get greener pasture for their animals and also food for themselves so

254 they were running away from drought and famine. That is another reason, so somebody to tell us another reason for the Luo migration in Kenya.

Learner: They had diseases and epidemics.

Teacher: Who was affected by these diseases and epidemics?

Learner: Humans and animals.

Teacher: These and livestock and so they needed to move to a better environment. Okay So there was epidemic and other diseases that affected both animals and humans. So these were both human and livestock and so they wanted to move to other areas that were not affected by these diseases where the environment was healthy for both humans and livestock. Okay. Any other factor?

Learner: In search of better fishing grounds.

Teacher: Okay. They were not only pastoralists but also fishermen therefore they were moving out to look for areas where there is fish and which were those areas they found?

Learner: Lake Turkana.

Teacher: Lake Turkana?

Learner: Turkana not Luos.

Learner: Lake Victoria.

Teacher: Yes Lake Victoria isn’t it? Yes is there any other reason?

Learner: Looking for adventure.

Teacher: Yes there was that group that moved not for any other reason but to look for adventure, those who wanted to go and see for themselves how other areas looked like. Another factor that may have contributed, yes?

Learner: External threat from their neighbours.

Teacher: Who were their neighbours?

Learner: Dinka, Shiluk and Nuer.

Teacher: Yes, then what else?

Learner: Internal conflicts between families.

Teacher: Yes apart from external threats from their neighbours there were also internal threats that made them move and this could be at family level or clan level, so there were both internal and external threats that forced them to move away from their original home to settle elsewhere. Any other factor we have not looked at?

255

(Silence from students).

Teacher: Okay. The Luos started moving around what time?

Learner: Around fifteenth century

Teacher: Yes around the fifteenth century they moved in groups in four distinct groups which were these, when they started moving they moved in four groups. Tell us one group and you the other, like that, I do not want one person giving us all the answers. Please put down your hands so that people like **** who hasn’t spoken may have a chance.

Learner: Joka Jok.

Teacher: Joka Jok was one group and then your neighbour there to tell us another one.

Learner: Joka Owiny.

Teacher: Another group?

Learner: Joka Omolo.

Teacher: And lastly?

Learner: Joka Suba.

Teacher: This group is also known as the Luo Abasuba. Now from there I want you to look at each one of these groups. They were not small groups and these groups now moved together and each of these groups had reasons why they were moving from their homes. For example we look at Joka Jok. First of all what does this word mean?

Learner: People of Jok.

Yes it means people of Jok. Therefore it means that these people had a sense of belonging, that they belonged to Jok where Jok means what? Amollo, tell us why do they call themselves people of Jok?

Learner: They belonged to the Jok community, Jok is their ancestor, Jok is a name.

Teacher: So Jok is a name. Do you still have that name amongst the Luo?

Learner: Yes.

(Students start fumbling and calling out the name).

Teacher: Okay so we have established that Jok is a name and they may be calling themselves with the name of their ancestor. So this group the Jok moved from their cradle land which was southern Sudan, they moved across which other country before they came into Kenya?

Learner: Uganda.

256

Teacher: And I think you draw a map show the original homeland of the Luo in southern Sudan. Draw an arrow showing how they were moving from Uganda to Lake Victoria region and then to Kenya, so I expect you to draw that map. Now the Joka Jok move from their original home in southern Sudan and settled in Uganda, which part of Uganda did they settle in first?

Learner: Pabungu Pakwach.

Teacher: Where?

Learner: Pabungu Pakwach.

Teacher: No that is another area. Somebody else tell us where they settled?

Learner: Ramogi Hills.

Teacher: Yes they settled in Ramogi Hills but where are these Ramogi Hills?

Learner: But this is in Kenya not Uganda.

Teacher: We are not told exactly where they had settled in Uganda so they may not even have settled by the way, they may have just moved from Bahr-el-Ghazal region across to Uganda and then back to Kenya and then in Kenya may have been a first settlement place, that is Ramogi Hills in Kadimo and this was around what time? This was around what period?

Learner: Fifteenth century.

Teacher: This was around the fifteenth century and later two sons of Jok decided to start moving and where did these two sons moved to? They fled, it is like they were running away from something we are told theta they fled ran away and then when they fled where did they go?

Learner: South Nyanza.

Teacher: Yes across winam Gulf to some clans which were these?

Learner: Karachuonyo.

Teacher: Karachuonyo? It is? And who else? Yes then they moved to other areas which were these areas?

Learner: Asembo.

Teacher: Asembo, one group settles in Asembo and the other group?

Learner: Alego.

Learner: Sakwa.

Teacher: Yes Alego and then the other group Sakwa. That is all, so they settled in three regions and the migration we are told that they migrated was caused by several reasons which were these? We are told of internal conflicts which means that when they settled in Ramogi Hills, they started

257 having conflicts and that forced them to move and when they moved they occupied those areas. So that was about the Joka Jok. So the other group was the Joka Owiny. The Joka Owiny, remember all these people were at the Bahr-el-Ghazal region. The first group to move were the Joka Jok and they were followed by the Joka Owiny. How did they move?

Learner: From Bahr-el-Ghazal to Uganda.

Teacher: So it is like they all moved from Bahr-el- Ghazal to Uganda before coming to Kenya. They moved from their main area of origin which in Sudan and I hope you know where Sudan is?

Learner: It is in the north of Kenya.

Teacher: North of Kenya? Is it?

Other Learners: Yes.

Teacher: From there they moved somewhere in Uganda and then moved in Kenya and settled. So when was this when these other second group arrived and settled in Kenya?

Learner: Around the seventeenth century.

Teacher: This was two centuries after the first group. The first group had moved out in the fifteenth century and now this group followed two centuries later. Then they came to Kenya and then we are told that Owiny, they were naming themselves maybe after their leader or ancestor because Joka Owiny was a name taken from Owiny, was who? Can the Luos help us please?

Learner: A leader.

Teacher: A leader, so maybe he was the one who led them when they were moving out of southern Sudan I’m not sure.

Learner: He was a warrior.

Teacher: A warrior is a leader, so he led them out and he is also referred to as the Ruoth Ruoth meaning?

Learner: It means a leader.

Teacher: And then his people were referred to as Joka Ruoth Joka Ruoth, meaning (Learners in chorus) people of Ruoth.

When these people moved from Bahr-el-Ghazal and then to Uganda and back in Kenya where did they settle in Kenya? I want answers from people who haven’t spoken yet, I want everybody to participate (addressing a learner). Tell us they settled where from Uganda.

Learner: In western Kenya.

258

Teacher: In western Kenya they settled where?

Learner: In Kisumu, Nyakach and South Nyanza.

Teacher: Okay The second Luo group that moved from Bahr-el-Ghazal to Uganda and back to Kenya settled in Kisumu, Nyakach and South Nyanza. Now the third group were the Joka Omolo also followed Joka Owiny and these ones came from where - can we get the answer from somebody who has not talked today. Okay. **** tell us something.

Learner: Northern Bunyore.

Teacher: YES from Northern Bunyore, where did they finally settle?

Learner: In Uganda.

Teacher: Where?

Learner: In Banda and Ingoni.

Teacher: And then settled where?

Learner: In Ugenya and Gem.

Teacher: And then as they were migrating they interacted with some people, who were they?

Learner: The Abagusii.

Teacher: Who else? From the corner there, yes?

Learner: The Abaragoli.

Teacher: The Abaragoli and who else?

Learner: The Abakuria.

Teacher: And then they spread to which areas?

Learner: Alego.

Teacher: Alego and then some of the Joka Jok family groups moved to?

Learner: South Nyanza.

Teacher: In south Nyanza where they settled and are found up to today. The last one is Abasuba. We are told that this group is associated with the Luo although they are Bantu in origin.

Learner: It is because they interacted a lot with the Luos.

Teacher: Yes they would have interacted with the Luos. So who are they, are they Luos or Luhyias or what? Okay they are a mixture of the Bantu refugees from Uganda who intermarried with the Luos and settled at the Mfungamano Islands. So although they are Bantu origin, they adopted the Luo culture and customs. Okay that brings us to the end of the migration of the Luos

259 so next time we will look at the effects of the Luo migration in Kenya and then move on to the Plain Nilotes. So I want you to read and write notes on the effects of the Luo migration and go as far as the results of the Plain Nilotes migration in Kenya.

(Learners disagree, some say no).

Teacher: We have a lot to cover. We have a lesson tomorrow so make sure you go through the work before our next lesson.

260

Date: 26/07/2006

PGBS 2

TIME: 1:45-2:25PM.

NUMBER OF STUDENTS: 54

FORM 1B

Learner: Yes.

Teacher: So we discuss the topic?

Learners: Yes.

Teacher: Alright. So can you tell us the meaning of Bantu?

Learner: These are a group of people who speak a similar language.

Teacher: Yes what else about the Bantu?

Learner: They are the largest group in Africa.

Teacher: Yes and they occupy about two thirds of Africa south of the Sahara. Yes and what is believed to be their original home?

Learner: It is believed that they originated from between eastern Nigeria and the Cameroon.

Teacher: Yes it is believed that they originated between eastern Nigeria and the Cameroon, an area that is generally referred to as the Congo Basin. Okay from there, they are believed to have migrated, by the way where is that area where they originated from in the map of Africa?

Learner: Central Africa.

Teacher: Central Africa, now from there where did they go?

Learner: Eastern Africa.

Teacher: Eastern Africa?

Learner: To the Congo Forest.

261

Teacher: Did they go to the Congo Forest? Yes, they moved to the Congo basin an area that is known today as? How is this place called today?

Learner: Congo.

Teacher: Congo? Only Congo?

Learner: Zaire.

Teacher: Do you think so? Zaire?

Learner: Democratic Republic of Congo.

Teacher: Yes Democratic Republic Of Congo. Okay their migration, how did they migrate? How did they do it?

Learner: After the Congo forest where they had a major dispersal point they now moved to the west where there was another dispersal point. This is where we find that some groups moved to Uganda such as the Baganda, the Bunyoro and others moved on. And then they moved later to Mt. Kilimanjaro where there was another dispersal point, where they moved to Shungwaya and there again there was another dispersal point.

Teacher: Yes, you have given us a long explanation now can anyone take up from there from Shungwaya that became another major dispersal point. From there they started moving to different directions, where did they move? Why?

Learner: They had some conflicts with the people like the Oromo who were threatening them there so they migrated from Shungwaya.

Teacher: Can you speak loudly for the whole class to hear what you are saying?

Learner: When they settled at Shungwaya.

Teacher: What?

Learner: They first settled at Shungwaya but because of some conflicts with the Oromo they moved inwards into Kenya where they settled in their original areas. Some settled between Tana River and River ee ...

Teacher: It is river Java.

Learner: Yes, something like that.

Teacher: It is river Java not something like that!

Teacher: (To another learner). Yes do you want to continue from there go ahead.

Learner: I just have a question. He has said that some moved from Shungwaya to Kenya and you also said that Shungwaya is in Kenya.

262

Learner: No, inside Kenya.

Teacher: Yes, you said that Shungwaya is in which part of Kenya?

Learner: At the Coast.

Teacher: Yes at the coastal part of Kenya so you are saying that they moved into the interior parts of Kenya?

Learner: Yes.

Teacher: Okay go ahead.

Learner: When there was conflict between these Bantus and the Oromo some Bantus stayed at the coast while others like the Akamba, Agikuyu moved while others did not and stayed there but later dispersed from Uganda, actually this part was in Uganda before the map was redrawn.

Teacher: Who else has something else to say about the Bantu migration? Did they all move in one day as a group or did they agree upon themselves that today onwards we are going to start moving. How did this happen? Somebody else? Yes?

Learner: The movement was gradual and slowly involving small groups.

Teacher: Yes it was gradual and slow so a small group would be moving today and then another would move some other day, so it was not something that they decided that today we will be moving to such and such a place. It was not so organized but gradual but then very slow. Now around what time were they moving? Particularly from Shungwaya around what year?

Learner: Around the half of the 19th century.

Teacher: When was this, it is clearly written on the Book when was it?

Learner: Five hundred B.C.

Teacher: Five hundred B.C., which is when they started moving from the Congo Basin. Okay now we can look at the reasons why the Bantu migrated especially from Shungwaya where they had already settled and then Shungwaya became a dispersal point from where they now moved from different directions. Now that group that went to the coast from Shungwaya, how is it referred to?

Learner: The coastal Bantu.

Teacher: Yes what?

Learner: The coastal Bantu.

Teacher: Really? How about those who moved around Mount Kenya region?

Learner: Highland Bantu or Mount Kenya Bantu.

263

Teacher: Yes highland or Mount Kenya Bantu. And how about that group that moved along Lake Victoria region?

Learner: Western Bantu.

Teacher: Yes western Bantu. O.K can we look at the reasons why the Bantu migrated. Reasons for the Bantu’s migration?

Learner: Because they had knowledge in iron-working they produced more food which made population increase and due to population pressure made them move.

Teacher: Population pressure? By the way speak up.

Learner: Due to food production there was population pressure that made them move.

Teacher: Population pressure, but you were saying something about iron what was it about?

Learner: Because the Bantu were iron workers they were able to produce a lot of food which led to population pressure.

Teacher: Now where is the connection between iron-working and food production and population pressure?

Learner: The knowledge improved food production.

Teacher: How? Somebody else?

Learner: They used iron to make farming implements.

Teacher: Yes they used iron to make farm implements. They also used iron to make more food and with increase of food what happened, there was population increase and what followed population pressure which eventually forced them to migrate, you can summarize that point as the population pressure. That population was becoming too high that they had to move out. Another reason for Bantu migration.

Learner: More fertile land for farming.

Teacher: Yes the fact that they were farmers they also needed land for farming. Another point, I hope you have these points in your books so we just discuss. Another reason?

Learner: Diseases and epidemic that attacked both human and animals.

Teacher: Yes so tell us more.

Learner: They were moving to areas with better environment.

Teacher: Okay tell us another reason why did they migrate?

Learner: To escape drought and famine.

264

Teacher: Tell us and explain the point. They were running away from what?

Learner: Drought and famine.

Teacher: Where?

Learner: From their home of origin in Shungwaya.

Teacher: Somebody else who has not told us anything? Another factor?

Learner: They were escaping external threats from their neighbouring communities.

Teacher: Who threatened them?

Learner: Oromo.

Teacher: Yes there was a group that threatened them and that was the Oromo. Yes another reason for Bantu migration?

Learner: Some Bantu communities travelled to satisfy their desire for adventure.

Teacher: Again?

Learner: They were moving as a result of desire of adventure.

Teacher: Adventure?

Learner: Yes.

Teacher: What does that mean?

Learner: Just to explore.

Teacher: Yes there was a group that moved just to explore and have an adventure. Alright, who else can tell us another reason why the Bantu migrated? Somebody who has not told us anything?

Learner: They were also escaping from internal conflict.

Teacher: They were escaping from internal conflicts, yes.

Learner: Question, just about internal conflicts, if you are a family how do you move away from each other?

Teacher: Yes you can move away from each other even if you are brothers and sisters you can move out.

Learner: Question, it has been said that the Congo Basin is home of Bantus, are there Bantus there?

Teacher: Yes there are many, there are many Bantus in Africa apart from ones we know they did not all leave the Congo basin some are still there, when they were migrating not all everyone migrated there are some who did not migrate.

265

Learner: Are their language similar to ours?

Teacher: Not similar but related.

Learner: Question, can we talk of natural calamities as a reason for the migration of the Bantu?

Teacher: Natural calamities, but you must be able to explain and give examples. What natural calamities?

Learner: Floods.

Teacher: Floods, have we talked about anything to do with floods? Natural calamities is ambiguous, which calamity are you talking about?

Learner: yes we have just talked about drought and famine.

Teacher: Yes, drought and famine is part of natural calamities and haven’t we talked about this already? Okay are there any factors that led to the Bantu migration that we have not looked at? From there we have to look at each one of the Bantu groups. There are mainly three Bantu groups that settled in Kenya, that is the western Bantu, the eastern Bantu and the highland Bantu (teacher writes these on the board).

Learner: Are there central Bantus because the eastern Bantus comprised of the coastal and highland Bantus.

Teacher: Okay it comprised the western Bantu and the eastern Bantu whereby the eastern Bantu comprised of which and which?

Learner: Highland Bantu and central Bantu.

Learner: Do we have central Bantus?

Teacher: Who are the central Bantus?

Learner: Are they the highland Bantus? (Learners murmur to disagree).

Teacher: You are asking whether central Bantus are the eastern Bantus. But who are the central Bantus in the first place? There are no central Bantus; they are not called central Bantus.

Learner: Mount Kenya Bantus.

Teacher: Let us move on, we do not have central or mount Kenya Bantus. From there, now after talking about the reasons why the Bantu migrated, we are supposed to look at each of these groups and dig out some of the communities of each group and look at why they migrated from their original home and then how they migrated. First of all we look at the western Bantu and the people that comprise that group of Bantus that make up the western Bantus. So who are the people that make up the western Bantu? Tell us one.

266

Learner: The Abasuba.

Teacher: Yes, the Abasuba is one of them (Teacher writes the names on the board).

Learner: Abakuria.

Learner: Abaluhyia.

Learner: Abagusii.

Teacher: And who else?

Learner: Banyoro.

(Laughter from class).

Teacher: No Banyoro.

Learner: Abawayo.

Teacher: Abawayo are a group from other groups.

(Interruption, another teacher comes to class to ask the boys to go to Biology lab 2).

It is a group from the Abaluhyia community you know the Abaluhyia is also composed of other smaller groups like the Wanga.

Teacher: Why are they called the western Bantu? Who can tell us why they are given that term the western Bantu?

Learner: Because they settled in western Kenya.

Teacher: What period?

Learner: Around one thousand A.D.

Teacher: Around one thousand A.D. to when? You see this settlement was also not done in one year or even one month it was slow and gradual and took a long period of time.

Learner: Between one thousand AD to fifteen hundred A.D.

Teacher: Yes between one thousand and fifteen hundred AD. From there we will look at each group, we will look at their original home and then why they moved from their original home, how they moved and then how they settled in their present area, okay. We will start with the Abaluhyia, now most of the information that tell us about how they were moving is derived from various sources of information. Now, how do we get to know about this? From which source?

Learner: Oral tradition.

Teacher: Really? Oral tradition? (Some learners say ‘yes’ some say ‘no’). Am not sure about that because oral tradition are never so accurate.

267

Learner: Teacher, I do support oral tradition because we find that archaeologists or even linguists based on history and they rely on oral traditions for the information or knowledge it is the old men who told the people what had happened.

Teacher: Now this old man who was alive among those people by the time this history was being written?

Learner: Teacher, oral tradition is transferred from one person to another by word of mouth so even if the original people had died the stories would still live on as they were told to people in that society for many years

Teacher: But is this accurate? How would you know that what you are being after so many years is actually the truth?

Learner: But teacher, it is even being supported by the books oral tradition has been stated as one way that historians got their information.

Teacher: Yes the books say that but.

Learner: Okay teacher, I support linguistics. Linguistics is the study of languages. The word Bantu means people who can speak a similar dialect so this is what defines a group as a western Bantu, eastern Bantu or coastal Bantu.

Teacher: Is it? So you think that this information was derived from linguistics as a source of history? Okay, what do you have to say? What do you think?

Learner: I think it is oral tradition because you see oral tradition was the main source of history, they passed on information from one generation to the next so these stories became the source of information.

Teacher: But for how long can oral tradition be used because if oral tradition is something that must be told by the word of mouth by the time history is being written.

(There is a lot of noise at this point as each learner supports a different view and maintains that his view is the correct one).

Teacher: Let us have some order, yes

Learner: Teacher, I can support anthropology. The historians.

Teacher: Which historian?

Learner: The book says.

Teacher: I need your support.

Learner: it has not been historically proven so I think it is anthropology.

268

Learner: No I suggest that it is archaeology.

Teacher: why do you think that it is archaeology?

Learner: It is archaeology even the book says.

Teacher: Even the book says but why do you think so?

(Lots of murmur from and argument from the students).

Teacher: Can we have one person talking and not all of you discussing at the same time.

Learner: From the way they are presenting the work they are saying that these people originated from Misri but it has not been historically proven from the archaeologists themselves, so this shows that it is archaeologist because they must prove something just for it to be considered as a true source so I think it is archaeology.

Teacher: You think it is archaeology but from the way you are discussing that point it is as if archaeology cannot be the right source. Well somebody to give us another source? There is a lot of noise in the class so unless you are answering a question I do not want to hear you talk.

Learner: It is anthropology because if anthropology is the study of way of life so this means that the people must have been right or correct with the information that they were giving.

Teacher: Whatever the source, what are they telling us about the original place of the Abaluhyia?

Learner: Misri in Egypt.

Teacher: Okay. According to the Bible, the Bible tells us that this place is in Egypt. Where is this place modern times?

Learner: It is being associated with Malta at the coast but it has not been historically proven. (Other learners disagree with him). Yes it is written, let me read for you.

Teacher: Come on do not read for us, we do not know where Misri is but let us move on. We are told that the Abaluhyia originated from an area called Misri however what is the original place of the Abaluhyia, forget about Misri?

Learner: The Congo Basin.

Teacher: Yes like all the other Bantus they came from the Congo Basin. And then we are told that as they migrated like any other community that was migrating they interacted with other people, there is no group that was pure as they moved on they interacted with other people, intermarried and produced a new set of people such that by the time they were settling in Kenya we cannot refer to them as a pure Luhya. But eventually they settled in Kenya, when was it that they settled?

Learner: Around three hundred A.D.

269

Teacher: Yes around three hundred A.D. Most of them had already settled in Kenya, then what was their dispersal point in Kenya?

Learner: Mount Kenya region.

Teacher: Mount Kenya region, which became their dispersal point and then from there they settled in different places. Which places did they settle, can we name them?

Learner: Marama.

Teacher: Marama another group?

Learner: Tiriki.

Learner: Maragoli.

Learner: Wanga.

Learner: Bunyore.

(Teacher writes these names on the board)

Teacher: As they spread to these directions they interacted with they found so by seventeen hundred A.D. they had settled in their present home. They interacted with the Cushites, Nilotes. The interaction between the Luhya and the Maasai, what was the result of that? The Maasai who are Nilotes and the Luhya who are Bantus, what was the result?

Learner: It led to intermarriages.

Teacher: Yes and the Luo also interacted with the Luhya the Marachi, Samia and what was the result of all this?

Learner: When the Luhya interacted with the Maasai, they founded clans like Idaho and when they intermarried with the Luo they found the Abasuba group.

Teacher: Yes fine, what else?

Learner: When Luhya interacted with the Luo they borrowed their language and vice versa such that there are Luo words being used amongst the Luhya and also the Luos have words that they borrowed from the Luhya community.

Teacher: We are told that their interaction led to so many clans, so can we name them?

Learner: Bunyore.

Learner: Wanga.

Learner: Bukusu.

Learner: Acholi.

270

Learner: Kabras.

Learner: Marachi.

(Teacher writes these names on the board).

Teacher: That brings us to the end of Buluhyia. Read about the Abakusu as you read look at reasons why they moved, what happened when they moved and how they moved and read and make notes. Any question?

(None).

(Learners leave class-going to the lab).

271

Appendix 8: Interview Guide for the Main Study

Modified pilot schedule used for the main study

This schedule includes a set of issues that were discussed with the teachers. Amongst other factors, it served as a checklist to ensure that all relevant issues are addressed with each teacher. However, it was not followed rigidly. The assumption here is that “individual respondents define the world in unique ways” (Merriam 1998, p.74), thus as the researcher I responded to the emerging views of the teachers and new ideas raised in relation to the issues I had identified as important when reflecting on data collected in the pilot study.

The following questions were asked:

. What informed the selection of content or the design of the lesson?

. What processes were involved when decisions were made?

. Who interpreted the syllabus aims for you as a teacher?

. What essential principles came out of such an interpretation?

. How do you work with such principles in the lessons?

. What is supposed to be the importance of the aims of the syllabus to your teaching or what are your thoughts about these aims?

272

Appendix 9 : Interviews with the teachers for the Main Study

31.05.2006

PGDW1 School

Angela: Thank you for allowing me the time. I would like you to take me through the lesson you had just completed, I need to know why you taught the way you did, why you were doing what you did.

Teacher: Okay, before I started with the Nilotes I decided first of all to review the lesson, that was to connect for the learners the known experience with the unknown experience. After the effects socially, economically and politically to the Bantu, whenever they settled in Kenya, I wanted the learners to understand more about the Nilotes. They are classified into four categories and it was not enough just to classify the Nilotes, but I wanted specifically to go into more details and at this point I started with the River Lake Nilotes. At this juncture I had to give them more knowledge and I had to give them specific societies related to the River Lake Nilotes. This specific topic requires a lot of exposure. The learners need to know more about other societies or groups that are involved because we cannot deal with the history of the Kenyan Nilotes alone without discussing other communities outside Kenya. I had to tell them about other Nilotic speakers who are also found in Sudan and Uganda. So generally, after exposing them to different groups, then I had to narrow it down to the topic of discussion which was the Nilotic people of Kenya up to the 20th century. Specifically, I had to come up with the reasons why they were migrating. The reasons why they were moving from one region to the other coming from the southern part of Sudan, for example the Bahr el Ghazel, and then I decided to tell them to go and read about it. That was the first thing. The causes of migration amongst the Kenyan people were somehow the same, the only difference was occurring because of their economic activities. From there I moved to and started talking about the Luo in particular, and gave them examples of the Luos we have, the different sections of the Luo we have, and where they settled and compared… this is to enhance national unity. It is fairly convenient in a cosmopolitan town like Nairobi, but specifically if you are in a rural area, for example, it is much harder. Take for example a school like this one, you can get a student by the name Joy Opiyo. But Joy Opiyo comes from a family where it is only the father called Opiyo and the mother might be from a different tribe all together, so the learner doesn’t know much about the other ethnic background. For example, even in the school where I was in before coming here, I would give learners work to go and get information more about their communities and the information I got or what I got or what they did was not fruitful. It turned out to be negative and I

273 realized that this kind of method cannot work here in Nairobi, so that one I had to brush it off. At the same time I’m trying to enhance what we call ‘the nationhood’, what we call ‘Kenya’.

Angela: Yes, that is also my point of interest.

Teacher: Yes, that is not so easy for a learner in Form One. Of course they know where they come from but sometimes it is very sensitive and I find that we really don’t like to get the learner to the personal issues, because at times you never know whether you are hurting him/her. So we find that History is really trying to expose generally to the learners that there are very many societies in Kenya and these forty two tribes we have in Kenya. I would also like to say as a History teacher that these societies are not static. People keep on moving and mixing with others, therefore this idea of saying that we are specifically forty two, in fact we are almost double now because the moment we have intermarriages, a different society comes up. So this idea of saying that we are forty two may have been there before independence, it was a colonial set-up where they divided Kenyans along tribal lines in order to make them not to mix up and have a common agenda on how to remove the colonizers. With this kind of orientation we still have the notion that certain areas belong to certain communities and with this in mind, as historian, I can see that there is a danger, because the moment I say that Central Province belongs to the Kikuyu people, that would be wrong, because when you go there you will find some Kambas, Luos etcetera. And this Kamba who lives in central province has married a Kikuyu, the kids come to school like this one, who is she? That is the problem, so what we can do is to sensitize our learners, let them know that they are Kenyans just the way Americans say I’m an American. In America they call themselves American people. If you go to France you get the Black French men they call themselves French, they don’t say we are half way French, you know, they will look funny, so the same should apply for us. The moment I start getting information from the learner, let’s say I’m discussing the Bantu and I tell a student you are a Bantu tell us all about the Bantu, the other students will just look at her and say, tell us about the Kikuyu. Now Muthoni is in Nairobi, they are urbanized; she has never gone to the rural area. The father is an accountant in Nairobi and the mother a teacher. She was born and grew up in Nairobi, even to speak the Kikuyu language is a problem. Then you ask another student, the same scenario will arise/follow.

Also for us to eradicate this problem of tribalism it is only us who can fight and stop tribalism in this country. The moment we go to the root of somebody that will end tribalism. And for me to be a Kenyan the learner gets to know that in a country called Kenya we have several societies which make the nation. So we have the Bantu and we divide them into communities. Although we are saying that during their migration some of them went and settled in western Kenya, or eastern all the same be it the Nilotes or the Cushites, all these people settled and formed a society called ‘Kenya’. And it is this kind of initiation that can help the learners. In fact even the books should be changed so that we talk of a society called Kenya but made up of other societies that form Kenya.

274

We can call them the nuclear societies that make up a larger society called Kenya and we shall be proud of it. That is why you realize that I cannot make that mistake of saying that so-and-so is from such-and-such a tribe that one is very dangerous. What about the Somalis because they are very few?

Angela: Do you think that your learners see themselves in relation to their tribe? Do they see themselves as different from each other?

Teacher: Yes that exists. The students classify themselves according to the social classes in the society. Actually in this country I feel that we do not have the problem of tribalism. No, we have the problem of classes, of people; we have those people who are up and those who are low and that kind of classification also messes the ability of the learners in their mind. The learners also have those classes in their mind; that I belong to this kind of class that is very rich and not necessarily about a tribe or an ethnic group.

Angela: So it is more of a class identity and not ethnicity?

Teacher: Yes.

Angela: Well, if there is this division in terms of class structure, how are you able to unite them? Teacher: Sometimes someone can be carried away and you get out of the general objective of teaching history and start going on tribal lines, and this becomes a problem because the learner will leave knowing that we were taught by one of our History teachers that in Kenya if you do not belong to a particular community then you cannot make it. I try to enable the learners to know that they are in a world that is dynamic.

Angela: The Koech report talks of subjects like History to be used to nurture the concept of patriotism, of knowing who we are, where we are headed in order to fit into a global world or society. When you are preparing your lessons and you look at the specific objectives in relation to the policy, are there aspects you keep in mind, are there objectives you aim to achieve?

Teacher: The learner is supposed to know the history of the country. At the same time we cannot ignore the fact that these are the growing youngsters and they need to be taught values - which is history-related, and unless we talk about the unity of the country, how can we achieve it? We cannot achieve the unity through church or public baraza. The only way that we can achieve it is through education systems. That is why the objectives in History and Government. All these topics - the way they are arranged maybe from the K.I.E. or from the Ministry of Education is first of all to give the learner knowledge. National unity comes in the topic of Human Rights. You see if only these topics can be integrated into other topics so that as you teach you run across all the values that would be better. Take for example the topic of the Early Man. There is nothing in this topic that covers national unity, also the topic of Development of Agriculture and even the topic on

275

Transport and Communication, there is nothing to do with national unity in these topics. So you find that the problem is even with the curriculum developers, they should not separate this issue of patriotism or nationhood to the last topics. The other problem is that the burden of bringing unity to the nation is now on the shoulder of the historians. My worry is only one; it is that History as subject is the subject for girls, yet the girls are not leaders of this nation. In the future, as you know, the men who take History are very few. Sooner or later we are going to lack historians in this nation because everybody has gone to the sciences or to the co-operate world. So what will happen to the nationhood we are fighting for in this country? A subject like History is optional, so I will be talking about patriotism and nation-building in Form One and Form Two and when they move to Form Three that will be the end of nationhood and it will be over. You see now if History is made compulsory that would be better. The better if we can achieve nationhood in our country, otherwise we shall still remain disintegrated and if it shall be made compulsory. Another thing is that the teachers of History need refresher courses.

Angela: Why do you say that?

Teacher: Because you see that maybe we are by passed by time. For example, this teacher was taught in college how to impart knowledge to the learners, let us say twenty years ago, and I will keep on using these methods. I need to be updated and so apart from using the informal lecture methods or using questions and answers. Is there any way that we can make history more interesting so that we can even incorporate more?

Angela: You have talked about methodology. How useful was the exercise you gave to the learners?

Teacher: That one is quite okay, and I usually do it on higher levels and I find it more interesting, especially with the learners who have already chosen the subject to the higher level. It is quite easy for them to even write a paper on an issue, like currently we have the Form Three talking about the struggle of Kenyan independence, a very sensitive area, and I wanted to show them that the British did not give us our independence, and I was giving them the examples of the schools they had build here in Nairobi, like Jamuhuri, Nairobi School, Lenana School, Kenya High, and I gave them the assignment to go and look into the Mau Mau, what they called ‘the guerrilla war’. They went into the Internet to look for information and they have done a tremendous job, and I can see that the learners are able to grasp the idea of how things were going on, and they asked me about people like Denan Kimathi, was he really killed by the colonial government or killed by our own? I told them that that, one, I’m not able to answer but from what I know is that he was arrested during the colonial rule and was killed in Kamiti maximum prison. Some of these topics are too political and too sensitive also to tell the learners. I get that group discussion is much easier and beneficial in Form Three and Four. Giving them the term paper to discuss is very easy but in the lower

276 classes it is very taxing. They still do not know to draw information from the textbooks, in fact some of them do not even know that texts can also have mistakes, and usually I warn them when there are texts. Well, that is what I can say about group discussions. But basically we find that the forty minutes you cannot do much because the moment you give them a discussion, they take more time, and as teacher you are unable to achieve your objective. It will be very minimal because you will be competing against two things; one, to achieve your objectives because the learners must learn a new thing in every lesson. It is not to make them happy, no there must be something new in that lesson. Secondly, you are fighting against what we call ‘the time factor’ because the syllabus for this History and Government is quite wide, so you are running with time, and at least you must make sure that you are teaching as per the scheme, so with those in mind. There you find out that you better use, let’s say sixty percent of the time, and give the learner forty percent, it will work out. Form Three and Form Four you can give them fifty percent –fifty percent, their time fifty and yours fifty, with that you can be able to cope, otherwise it is very tricky. These children do not care. They are just there. They have found themselves in a country called Kenya. They do not see the importance. For example, just ask the people to sing the national anthem or to respect the nation flag when it is being raised.

Angela: Yes I remember we used to stand up.

Teacher: Yes but these ones will just talk, or do what they want. For them they are here in this nation but, for example, let’s say there is a fight between Kenya and Uganda and the country is looking for volunteers. People will be very shocked because there will be nobody to stand up to fight, instead they will run away. Things have really been diluted in this country, politically we are diluted, economically we are diluted and socially - that is the worst part of it - because the parents themselves do not care about the nation. It is individual and himself alone. The issue of viewing the nation as a wider family is no longer there, everybody takes care of themselves. You find that even some people have lost confidence in our institutions of learning. They even go to Uganda, Why? Does it mean that our schools and colleges are not competent enough? No, the thing is there is lack of trust, they do not trust their own. It is a country made up of foreigners. However we cannot rule out that we do not have patriotic people. I have noticed the Kenyan athletes when they have won and they wrap themselves up with the Kenyan flag, you see them crying, you know that that is someone who has that spirit a feeling that he/she has done it for the country, but other leave to run for other countries. However, this is something that we can achieve. We need to change the curriculum because the moment we do so then a subject like History will not be seen as the only subject that can develop nationhood, but we need to integrate these concepts in all the subjects. We are putting all these into one subject which is not even compulsory, so not every learner gets the opportunity to learn about these values. The concepts have to run across the education system, be it in the sciences, languages etcetera. So there is a need for curriculum change and they should try

277 and incorporate topics that can help the learners to know more about the country. More so the subject is also divided in such a way that the topics related to nationalism are diluted. They are spread far away, we don’t consider some of the topics which should enlighten our learners. Some of the topics which were very important are not included this time around.

These curriculum developers, do you know that some of them are not historians yet they are the ones who work on the syllabus? Even if you visit the K.I.E. the people who are there, especially those who are supposed to help the teachers, do not get any training. Look at the textbook for example, the person who has published in an Oxford book is not even a historian, he is someone working on geography yet he has written a book in history. So they just cut and paste so the kind of learners we are developing - and even though I’m not a prophet of doom - thirty years to come we shall have people who are so much affiliated to their tribal lines and the word ‘Kenya’ will be gone. The moment we change the Constitution and move to majimbo – federalism - that will be the end of this country. The moment you go to Rift Valley you don’t have to know about Nyanza or Western etcetera.

Look at another mistake that they have done. In primary school the Class Four Social Studies - do you know that the learners learn about their province only in Social Studies? Instead of just saying Social Studies Class Four should be about the provinces of Kenya. This means that the curriculum need to be reset, and if possible need to be done by patriotic people otherwise, if we continue like this, we will be dividing the country into parts. The objectives are there, policies are there, but putting it into practice seems impossible.

Angela: How do you handle the problem of textbooks because as you said there are those who have written textbooks and yet they have no background in history? As a teacher how do you guide the learner to let them know of the loopholes and the gaps so that they do not use the text as a gospel truth?

Teacher: I know this country is politically geared towards achieving something and if it is geared towards achieving something within the political fields, this one becomes a nightmare. I have studied history for quite some time now and am quite conversant, and when it comes to topics like in Form Three, now I have a topic about autobiography of the Kenyan leaders, exactly what they are saying is problematic. They are so few ... we have Jomo Kenyatta, Moi, Donald Ngala, Oginga Odinga and that’s all, so when we talk about the Kenyan leader, what does it mean? That is my question, a Kenyan leader - is it a political leader, religious - or it somebody who fought for independence? What are the leaders supposed to know? So me, what I do in such a topic first of all is to put down the textbook, look at the biography of prominent Kenyans that the learners are supposed to know. It is very simple, which legacy are they learning? Are they learning about political legacy or economical legacy or social? Are they learning about somebody who brought

278 changes in this nation to suit his goals or own political ends or who is who? We can even start from very far, for example somebody like Dedan Kimathi, who has been technically ignored in all books, maybe you can read about him in the periodicals - such information is vital to the learners. Then we come to another biography of somebody who is not clearly known to Kenya and this is somebody who had gone to the Lancaster conference considerable so, yet he is not known by anybody. Somebody like Martin Shikuku, those people who fought for independence. Then we pick our person from there then we move to after independence and pick for example Jomo Kenyatta. When he came to power historically we study about how he came to power, the K.A.U., and we know he was given leadership of K.A.U. by people like Mbiu Koinange, by virtue of being in the Lancaster conference and the like, so he was given the leadership of a party which he had not fought for from the beginning as a founder member. From there we see Kenyatta coming to the limelight and that is all. Whatever he was doing maybe he had acquired knowledge from the colonial government and that’s all. He was trying to put down what he was given at the second Lancaster conference in the year nineteen sixty, because he was told you take this document or leave it from there. That is all we learn about Kenyatta and his philosophy of Harambee and the like. President Moi, we also talk about how he came to power how he gained political seat by the late nineteen seventy eight, and all that he has done politically and that’s all.

But when we look at the K.C.S.E. exams, we find that that the questions they set that cover this area are set in such limited ways, for example, the political contribution of so and so. Now this kind of question cannot help a learner or Kenyan to know more about the nation, but if they can ask about the contribution one made to enhance unity to the nation, not political development, you find that when learners are learning they will look at issue relating to national unity. As for the textbooks, they are not straightforward, also they are written by people and fortunately we know those guys like the guys who have written the Oxford books, we know them, I know the subjects that they were teaching, and so I know their weaknesses, their connections with politics and the like to end up in that area/position. I can even write mine but because I do not know anybody it will not even be published or even given a clearance.

So as a teacher you must use your knowledge to help the learners, sometimes you get in the book lack of information, yet what the learners want is information, so I take the opportunity that I have to tell the learners what I know. Like when it comes to the topic of Mau Mau, I get to talk to the old people in the village, then they give me the information needed and you get information needed and you are also able to get information that has never been recorded anywhere and this makes your teaching richer and knowledgeable.

Apart from the textbooks a good historian must always dig or look for information. Most books are always geared towards passing exams but not about good knowledge to the learners. It is all about passing exams.

279

Angela: What would you recommend or advise in relation to teaching and learning of history regarding the policy? What do you advise?

Teacher: First of all we remove the quacks in the Ministry and even in the curriculum development. The people should be competent enough and should be people who are interested in History as a subject. Secondly, we remove the notion that it is only the History subject which can develop nationalism in this country.

Third we should put the topics that are related to nationality and nationhood into the other subjects. Fourth, we should have refresher courses. If at all we have Japan and the Kenyan government to sponsor Science subjects why not a subject like History, which is ignored? We assume that everybody can become a mathematician, yet in Kenya if you look at the grades most students fail sciences, in fact the government is wasting a lot of money and resources and yet the quality of citizens produced by such a kind of a system is weak, because even when the government has invested in these people, like the doctors, they always leave the country for greener pastures.

The teachers should not only focus on making the students pass exams, because this causes a problem. The question should be is it a quality A or the quantity A that the teacher is producing? What sort of a learner have I produced in the four years course? If teachers can be psyched to know that they are training learners who are patriotic to their country then this would help.

Administrators in schools should also have current affairs programme. If you ask a student who is not doing history any question related to Kenyans’ current situation, for example who is the Minister of Transport and Communication? They will not say Makuere, but mostly Michuki, they do not know. At the moment students are not able to answer very simple questions. We should also do away with irrelevant topics such as Transport and Communication and Agriculture in Mesopotamia.

There is a big gap between what the policy expects teachers to achieve and what the syllabus entails. These two are not connecting in terms of the topic that History teachers are supposed to teach. Topics like Scientific Inventions, how does this keep the learner or even the teacher to achieve the history objectives? Why can’t these topics be taught within the relevant subjects? History is about the society; how people interacted etcetera, in fact I don’t teach some of those topics.

Angela: Thank you so much for your time. These are interesting points. I wish we had more time to talk about them. (Interview ends).

280

13.06.2006

PBBW School

Angela: First, thank you so much for allowing me this time with you. Please take me through the lesson, how you taught?

Teacher: I wanted the learners to understand the concept of the clan because basically we know that most of the Bantu communities were clan-based and to make them understand what a clan is.

You have to involve them, at least, that is, the method I use. There are many methods, when I introduce a topic I normally tell the students to go through the topic first because if you are teaching them something new it is very difficult than when you teach them what they already know. You give the students the areas they are supposed to read, ahead of you, so that when you go over it they take notes. As you noticed when we identify a point we explain it and they take notes as we go through the work. They do it at the back of their books. Then when we deal with it in the class they have questions especially when confused about aspects of the topic. Mostly that’s what I do. As you saw for yourself it created a lot of student interaction. You know when they have done it, that is, read the topic before hand; they already know what you are talking about. For example I introduced the topic on the Bantu, gave them the objectives as they are written in the syllabus- by the end of the topic, in fact, I tell each student to write; I should be able to do the following so I give them the objectives first, then when I give them the work, they are already aware of the objectives and what they have to achieve by the end of the topic. So when I start teaching and as the lesson progresses they confirm with a tick what objectives we have achieved. That is what I do. For example, we discussed the migration of the Bantus - why did they migrate? We identified the reasons showing how the Bantus are indicating the various tribes. On the migrations I had also to draw a diagram showing the migration routes. When the Bantus, the area where they originated from was important to mention. The Congo Basin. So when they look at the maps students have an idea of where they are coming from and through where. Of course we also had to look at why the migrated. In fact the reasons are important. They may have moved as they tried to, looking for ll kinds of things. The Bantus because they were basically farmers they were looking for land for greener pastures for their animals. Even when you talk about the way they were attacked by external enemies because of this you talk of them moving because of external pressures. Then who were these people? You know that every community had trade because in case there were surpluses they needed to exchange that for other things which they lacked. Then others like hunting and gathering, those have been traditional occupation of man ever since, then agriculture depending on where the community is based, because like the Miji kenda who are Bantus and most of the Bantu communities have been farmers. Basically it is to make them understand that those

281 economic activities that those people had during the pre-colonial period actually are the very same ones which we have today. You must have realized that these students do not even know who these people are, they can talk about two unrelated communities, so you have to make them know where each community descended from otherwise they keep on contradicting the facts.

Angela: You seem to have a diverse class, having students from different Kenyan communities, how do you involve them?

Teacher: A lot. Yes I do. After the topic, that is, the migrations and all that; we are going to look at the social economic and political structures of the Kenyan communities up to the 19th century. At the time I may even become tribal and put them as per their tribes. If one is a Kikuyu he is made to discuss either the political or economic or social structures of the Kikuyu and, especially if they are going for half term I do ask them to create a dictionary so that, for example, if you are a Luo you should be able to tell the other what certain words mean, for example, what is Ja what is Piny, Jaduong, so I actually involve them. I involve them and I give them work when they are going home, to get information from home, whatever source they can use or come across.

Angela: but how can today’s topic be used to nurture the concept of who we are as Kenyans? I’m interested in how knowing about how the movement of the Bantus can help develop a sense of being Kenyan. How does the topic help you to develop this in the learners?

Teacher: Remember when we start teaching history we tell the learners and discuss why we teach history and government. One is to understand our culture, our background; then understand the culture of others so that you are able to understand them. So we tell them that when you see someone like in the dormitories someone who has tattoos on the body you do not laugh, that is, that person’s culture, that is part of their culture. There is a boy who is a Maasai with pierced ears, you must tell the boys and make them understand that that is his culture and you make them understand and appreciate each other’s culture and hence their differences. They should understand how these cultural traits were developed and not think that the other person is primitive. For example, yesterday a boy had an organizer in class then the others were all surrounding him and I got to class the boy told me you see I’m a Maasai and I haven’t seen a thing like this before so I want to see and learn. So you see they become conscious of what they are. And I tell them that we are not talking about a specific person but about the people then and what they practiced and then we see if these communities still practice the same things that they came into contact with as they moved into Kenya and within the country.

Angela: How do you help the learners to understand this concept of sharing cultural practices?

Teacher: From today’s lesson there are quite a number of factors that can help us achieve this. When we talk about the social systems of the Bantus, when we talk of the oral traditions, that is, passed from one generation to another, we identified the community’s cultural practices and talked

282 about their origin. In form one students are very good. They will tell you what they know, they will tell you even in their mother tongue, the different oral stories they know, even songs about their and other communities. But when they get to Form Two no one wants to be associated with that “old age” even a boy who used to know lots of oral stories, songs and even dances all of a sudden do not know them or have no idea because in their mind they think that if you know so much about your culture that is traditional practices then you must be “primitive”. So I think that is what it is. Yet I keep telling them that in form one you knew all these things and now how come you do not know. Like the question of linguistics, we find that some words though the same, mean a different thing lets us say in Kikuyu as compared to Meru. We have two languages they have one word but they mean different things. For example, we have the word Mtumia among the Kikuyu it means a woman, among the Wakamba it means an old man you see then you ask the boys from these tribes and they do not know, so I think the problem is the fact that most of these students come from urban areas and they seem not to be in touch with their cultural practices apart from those who live in the rural areas where their mother tongue is being used. They are still able to know about some of the cultural practices that are still taking place within their community. Children from Nairobi or other towns do not seem to have any knowledge of their own cultural practices and even for those who may know, remember, I mentioned, they do not want to appear “primitive”. So they never really own up to let you know that they do know about these practices.

You also learn to know that they tease each other about their mother tongue interference, it is like they have still not accepted the various differences that we have. In form 1 the first lessons, they are very difficult to control and you find that some students shy away from speaking in class because they fear the response of the others. No I make them now integrate; I make them understand the various backgrounds that exist in class. When we deal about human rights then I make them know that we are all human beings and so the human being in America is the same human being in Kenya and even in other parts of the world, where a person comes from does not make them a lesser human being. In fact, most of them would think that the whites are better than them. The other day I was talking about food situation in Africa and other third world countries and most of them thought that it is only in Africa where there is poverty, where third world countries exist, so I had to tell them that even in Latin America, parts of Asia people are poorer even than in most parts of Africa, but they do not even believe this. When we talk of slave trade, the Trans Atlantic Slave Trade, when we talk about Africans from West Africa and parts of Central Africa and South East Africa were being taken as slaves, the learners then would want to know why these were happening and by the end of the day the learners are able to identify themselves with other Africans outside Kenya and empathize, the suffering and by the end of the day, they do understand these differences and accept even though it takes time.

283

Angela: I’m drawing my argument from the Koech Policy; it stipulates that history as a subject should be used to nurture Kenyan culture, idea of patriotism. This has been translated into the syllabus and teachers are therefore expected to achieve these goals. So, do you give attention to these policy expectations and objectives?

Teacher: Yes I do think a lot. There are times like when we have to teach about national integration, factors which promote national unity, we look at factors which actually promote national unity. Today when we talk about the migration of the Bantus, for instance, we looked at all the factors that would help the learners understand the connections with people they came across in their movements. The explanations are bound to promote national unity. Students do not think or talk of tribalism but they talk of what is characteristic of people. I tried to make them think of a wider picture – Kenya. We talk about these connections and after a while they will appreciate them. You get to know that the learners do not only understand but also appreciate what they are being taught. So you see like when you make them aware in this manner, you see them changing their attitude. So we actually use history as much as possible to help them understand themselves, others, change their attitude and r general perspective to issues and life as a whole.

Angela: You agree that History as a subject can be used to achieve and nurture the concept of Kenyanization and nation-building?

Teacher: I agree. Yes we can. It is possible because when they get to know about other people and regions, this makes them aware of other people’s practices in relation to theirs.

But, we face a major challenge. The books are quite many in fact they are more than enough, and they present confusing and conflicting information such that you find that you use a book for example today in class I was talking about 50 000 years and another book has 40000 years the difference is too much, so what I do is that I avoid the figures as much as possible even the years are so confusing as books tend to present different years for the same events so that is a challenge. The objectives are there some books are having more than what we are supposed to cover. A lot others you don’t even know how far you are supposed to go and by the end of the day you find out that you have so much to read. Of course some books are also biased.

Angela: In a situation where a book is biased and it is a class text what do you do, how do you handle that? What would you recommend?

Teacher: Teachers need to get more guidelines from the ministry. For example you are given a topic you do not even know how far you need to go. If there could be more guidelines from the ministry that could help. I wonder why it is not possible for the ministry to make it possible for us to be assisted such that if you teach history we do not have this situation where in humanities it is as if they are trying to kill it subjects like history. They call it a booster subject so for it to happen it

284 should boost the teacher. Some even call it the dead subject, it is like it does not deal with any current issue yet that is not true we teach about current issues, current government systems etc.

Angela: Have you taken into consideration what the learners bring into the classroom?

Teacher: Yes, I did that. Before we came to this topic of The Political, Social and Economic Organizations, there was a topic on the people, that is The Emergence of the Kenyan People, where we also looked at the Nilotes and Cushites. So every time we talked about a community, I make sure that there is a student from that particular community who would tell us what basically they do, what were some of the economic activities etcetera, but we realize that the problem we have here, most of the boys are born and bred in town, most of them don’t even know what their roots are, if you ask them, they will always tell you I have always stayed in Nairobi, I have been born here, so sometimes it becomes difficult to tell them, even for them to know who they are and unless they receive these concepts through teaching which may not be practical, they will run away from their roots. And basically from my community, I’m a Meru, I try to show the, actually who the Meru are because I understand the community, like when we talk of the council of elders, the Miraa, all those I felt as though I were home and actually they were enjoying, but you see now for them being born in Nairobi, it is difficult for them. But in fact I taught this topic in Nakuru and it was different because you could go to the actual community and see and the students would be able to identify with some of the things and the people. At times I encouraged and even went for interviews using their mother tongue but here it is difficult to achieve this because of the town setup. Because you see that when you are talking of a particular community, for example you are talking about the Kikuyu, the participation is more from the Kikuyus in class than from the others; when you come to let’s say the Luos, it will be the same. So at the end of the day we are supposed to integrate and show how they should live/stay cohesively despite of disparities like tribe, religion. How are they able to transcend all of them and be Kenyan?

Angela: What do you think? Have you achieved this?

Teacher: For us teachers ours is to avail the information and once they have the information, we show them the limitations of tribalism. For example, in Form One we teach for national unity and national integration and we are supposed to look at factors that would promote or hinder national unity. So basically when talking about tribalism, we want them to transcend those tribal barriers and see themselves as one. I think as teachers we have always assumed that it is upon the students to make up their mind - do I remain a Kikuyu even after schooling or do I become a Kenyan a public figure because even in my class I always emphasis that when you come through schooling you should not look at yourself from a tribal perspective, we are Kenyans, be a citizen. It all depends on how the students gets information and how they are able to come out of, I mean, to have the information and transform when having ideas about how they can help to bring about

285 change and transformation. For us teachers ours is to avail the information and try and show them using, for example their class session - you are a Luo, you are a Kikuyu, we have different cultural backgrounds, cultural practices but how are we to tolerate each other’s culture? If I’m a Meru, how am I able to respect you [referring to the interviewer]? How are we supposed to live, coexist regardless of our difference? So you try to show them that those disparities are there but you try to appreciate each other and for them to do that they must be aware of the disparities, what are the various cultural differences that exist amongst them and how are they affected by them? I believe that by students sharing - because sometimes when we are looking at the people there are some areas where we want to make the students talk, like, for example, with we the Bantus there are some words that are shared, that are borrowed, but they are of different meanings in each of the community, so I would ask an Embu to use the same word in a statement, or a Meru or a Kikuyu, and I would show them how different these meanings are, yet these words are the same when pronounced, they were borrowed. You see, because they migrated together, these words might have been borrowed from other tribes but because of the different movements they have undertaken different meanings. I do think that discussions can do that if you group learners according to the different tribal groups or backgrounds.

Angela: In relation to education policy, do you work with the policy in mind?

Teacher: No, actually I don’t.

Angela: How do you plan?

Teacher: We do but we don’t. You know for the lesson plans at times we take them for granted. Well, although I do not have lesson plans, I do sit and plan for my lessons. I have to be well conversant with what I’m going to teach, even if I don’t have it on a written form. But for the schemes of work we have to make them at the beginning of every term and then we hand them in to the HOD and then each teacher is given a copy.

Angela: When planning we have both long-term and short-term objectives. Do you always work with these in mind?

Teacher: Yes. I do use or rather plan with the objectives in mind. You get that from the schemes of work even though many a times you realize you are not at par with the scheme. Well you know when you wrote the schemes you knew what to achieve but basically in most cases teachers do not refer, they just write them and hand them in as a procedure basically. Once the schemes have been given out nobody really bothers to find out if the teachers are really following the schemes.

Angela: Are you always able to address the objectives, be it the long term or short term objectives, by means of the content you teach and strategies you adopt in the lessons?

286

Teacher: I think it is not possible to achieve all your purposes. In a lesson you may have two or three objectives and you realize that by the end of the lesson you have at least achieved two so the third one you will integrate with another lesson, so sometimes it is overlooked or you don’t actually really follow because you should be systematic from the first day of the term. In this lesson I’m supposed to achieve this or that but you know the interruptions during the term and such things so sometimes it is not possible to achieve each and every objective. But for every lesson you teach you have an objective that you have intended to achieve.

Angela: Can history as a subject play the role that it is expected to play as stipulated in the policy?

Teacher: I think it would not. But that again will depend on several other issues. Like now you know history is an elective subject and by the time the students are selecting in Form Three, they have learnt not so much to say that a student can be transformed. Because the things they do in Form One and Two are basically foundation, even if you have to drop History there are some things that we want you to have achieved, for example this element of teaching students to the idea of national unity, the people, we want you to know that. But you know there are some students who have already formed an opinion; I will not proceed so they do not care, they are not very keen, but for the students who have the interest, I think it helps them because for those who take it in Forms Three and Four they are actually different, I think they actually transform. Even when you teach a concept you can see it’s part of them. I think if someone goes through the History curriculum completely from Forms One to Four you come out a changed Kenyan than you would have been without the knowledge or the process.

Angela: Thank you so much for your time. You have been very helpful. (Interview ends).

05.07.2006

PBBD School

Teacher 1

Angela: Well to start us off thank you so much for allowing me this time. I would like you to take me through the lessons that I observed and explain to me why you teach the way you do.

Teacher: Generally, I like to involve the students because I believe that when they prepare something it is not easy for them to forget and it also makes them feel part of the lesson, part of what is going on, so that it is not only the teacher who pours information. In the process I also get a chance to know their weaknesses and see how to strengthen them.

Angela: I saw learners presenting, how do you organize that?

287

Teacher: Normally I ask them to volunteer, who would pick which topic, then I ask them to go and volunteer read and when they need any book sometimes I give them and tells them what books to use that are relevant, and I encourage them to read and then write and when they come to present they try to convince us that they know what they are doing.

Angela: How do you use the policy in relation to the History syllabus, as it states that through history values like patriotism, nation-building should be enhanced and nurtured? What is your opinion on this?

Teacher: Actually it does, because for example teach them about man, where they started from and we want them to see why they are in Kenya, for example, who is here and why, and we also try to encourage them to see the effects man has had on the environment, what eeh, you know, we would like them to be able to see that Man actually affects or makes things change and therefore if he wants a good life then it is up to them to do the good thing. They try and avoid what Man has done in the past and look after the environment. And the environment is not just the physical but also the political. If they want good leadership, then it is up to them to keep their eyes open so that they are not taken for granted or they not just assume thing and they need to know their rights and then be able to vote them in or vote them out, in other words, they have a say in what happens to them. They get to know their rights.

Angela: How do the learners perceive themselves? Do you think that they see themselves as Kenyans or as belonging to their ethnic communities? Do they appreciate who they are?

Teacher: Yes, most often I start by asking them who is from this community and is there anything that they have observed that differs from people from other communities. Then as we look at each community we try to see and say that they are different and this could be because of their various background. And although they are different in the ways they organized themselves, I would indicate that their aim was the same, to get the society united and functioning, even though they had different ways of doing it, and; of course that would give them a feeling that although these people are different, we are different but we belong to the same country, same environment, even though we do things slightly differently. It also means that as individuals they also have a right to enjoy what is in the country with no discrimination.

Angela: What is in the History syllabus that would enable you to nurture this concept?

Teacher: I think what we are doing now, the people of Kenya, we look at the people and then when we come to the government I find it is useful that the government should be understood as created by the people and as supposed to serve the people regardless, and then also later on when we look at other countries we want them to be able to see that issues other countries are dealing with or how they are handling their own issues is important to them. We too need to handle our

288 own issues because others are doing it. We are not different from them so we too can handle our own issues.

Angela: Do you think that the learners appreciate who they are, be it Kikuyus, Kalenjins or whatever tribe they belong to?

Teacher: No, not these ones. What we notice is that they are not so eager to say who they are, that they belong to a particular community, for fear that others would start ridiculing them. So in fact they would like to look at the community other than their own. If am a Kikuyu I would want to look at and talk about the Kalenjins, for example, so that I can say the negative things about them. So we still have that element of people wishing to highlight what others do with the idea of belittling them or bringing them down. I really don’t think they are proud of who they are not yet.

Angela: Teaching in a diverse class like yours, how do you handle the various differences that learners bring into the classroom?

Teacher: Like you see in the two classes, I had the same topic; I always try to make sure that they are on the same level, the two classes I teach. So far this particular topic, I realized that it was easy for the students to even do it on their own so what I did was now to get the feedback and that is what they have done exactly. You know this is after various lessons and I have covered a whole topic in two lessons. I told them to do the work so that during the lesson they just come to respond, but is not that I use that method all the time, it depends on the topic.

Angela: What other methods do you use?

Teacher: You can see the method I use is lecture and question and answer methods. Sometimes we discuss and I even put the girls in groups where they are able to discuss on their own so if you noticed in the lessons we were also discussing but as a class, but occasionally I put the girls into small groups where they are supposed to research on a particular topic and even present, the girls have to come in front of the class and present to their class mates.

Angela: When you use these methods, for example the lecture method, how does it help you to achieve the objectives?

Teacher: You see, lecture method I use it when the girls are more acquainted with the topic because sometimes you lecture but the girls are not acquainted then it is of no use, it will not make an impact, but it is good when you use the lecture method, you also have other methods in the process so you are not only lecturing.

Angela: When do you involve learners in group discussions?

Teacher: You find that, for instance, in the topic Kenyan societies, we were looking at the Kenyan societies and that is a topic we have actually discussed more because we are able to actually get the

289 students from various communities, and this is important because you even get to a particular community and even get girls from that very community to present or lead in class discussions, like in social, political and economic organization they research and then present, and I found that one very effective when done in group discussions.

Angela: Why, how do you get the learners willing to participate? What is their attitude towards sharing what they think about themselves?

Teacher: Yes, first I really had to encourage them so that they can develop interest in their various communities. You see the problem we have, we have town dwellers, most learners come from the urban areas and it is like they are removed from the rural environment so as you start, they did not like to mention where they come from and it is like they even do not know about it and so when they were going for their mid-term I even told them to learn about their roots, to know something, to ask their parents and even when they went for the holidays and had to travel to the rural areas I would tell them to speak to the old people in their community. In fact I developed this even before we started on the topic so that as we went through you find out that the girls were actually interested in their communities and when we were learning this topic I would involve the learners, like if they are Bantus I will even ask them whether they belong to Kikuyu or whatever tribe. I encourage them to come out openly and say what community they come from and to be proud of who they are. Previously, I would say that they were not really willing to come up and identify with a given community, but now they seem to like it and they want to be associated with their communities, which I think is a good thing.

Angela: Well, so what you are saying is that so far the learners do appreciate who they are?

Teacher: Yes they have. In fact, even when we are looking at various communities they even want to say more, they want to say stories, like about what the Ameru, the students gave us quite a lot of information that were not even in the books and in fact personally I did not even know, so you find that some students really know about their community. But at first those who are town dwellers didn’t know but after they had learnt about their communities they really become interested. In fact I felt that these are girls who have come to appreciate who they are because now they can actually come up to say like “I’m a Luhya”, “a Kalenjin”, unlike when I started the topic.

Angela: Apart from appreciating who they are as belonging to a specific community, do you think this perspective helps them to view themselves as Kenyans?

Teacher: Yes.

Angela: How does the topic enable both the learners and you as a teacher to achieve that?

Teacher: The topic is actually well covered because apart from knowing the various communities, their tribal communities, the topic also covers interaction with other communities and the learners

290 come to realize that there is a lot of interaction through marriages, like between the Kikuyus and the Maasai, and they really appreciate it, and in fact it involved so many communities and this made them to realize that they were not just isolated tribes; there was a lot of intermarriages and this enables them to know and understand that it is good to interact, even long time ago people used to interact, so what would would make them different to stop them from interacting with people from other tribes? I realize that this topic not only focuses on tribal communities in Kenya but it even unites them, brings them together, to even understand. What I liked most was that they were able to understand what other communities did and after learning such a topic one realizes that there is no much difference. If you look at the political organization they are the same, the social and economic also the same, and there was also a lot of borrowing, you borrow this from this community.

Angela: How can history help us to nurture the concept of who we are as Kenyans? Do you think the teaching of history would enable learners to appreciate who they are as Kenyans?

Teacher: Yes, one is the emergence of communities, how we came to be in Kenya. You see that will make them to see that they are actually meant to be in Kenya and even to regard themselves as Kenyans. There is a lot we learn even about the government. The present government, the way we rule is not different from how the society was long time ago. The only problem is that the syllabus has changed quite a lot. In fact we do not do so much about other societies but there are so many things that have been introduced. Like if you look at agriculture, industrial development, it is not teaching us about our roots as such and I think that the system need to include more content because long time we used to learn about our society, but now they have included things like transport, how it is helping us like scientific inventions. But there is still a lot to be appreciated. If you look at it positively, like we need agriculture in our society, we need to industrialize. Even the constitution, in the constitution we also learn about how we are supposed to live so I still believe that history is a very important subject that should be developed. Maybe the content should be reviewed they need to revise the content so that we are actually teaching history and not science let it be history of our people. And we need people who will come up with policies, how are we preparing our children to be in a position to make policies, decisions, how are we preparing them to be our leaders of tomorrow? That is what history should be able to do.

Angela; Yes, I’m also looking at how history is able to be an eye-opener that would introduce the students to other cultures, other societies, other nations, so that we are able to understand the global content, that we do not just focus on who we are but also about other people.

Teacher: As I said earlier on, it is like history is not opening doors to other nations. Like you know we are talking about the history of West Africa, you know African history or even European history, Asian; if we are not doing that then we need to improve the syllabus so that we can include

291 all these. If you look at the former history as such, in Form One, they are not open learning about other societies, but as they progress like in Form Two, we have nowadays other countries, like in Uganda we look at the Buganda Kingdom and when we talk about rebellions we also look at other communities like Samouri Toure. When we look at nationalism, we do not just look at nationalism in Kenya but we even look at other societies outside Kenya, so maybe such topics are able to help our students to understand other countries. In Form Four we have forms of government in other countries like Britain, USA and India, so to some extent we can say that history is actually opening doors to other nations, but still I think that this is not enough.

Angela: In your own classroom situation how are you able to nurture each and every learner, given the fact that your classes are very diverse in terms of learners’ background? How are you able to help the learners understand their individual weaknesses and strengths and help them grow to be better people who are able to interact well in the society?

Teacher: Yes, this begins with the teacher. Like me, I do not hide the community I come from. I need to show and tell them that I appreciate the community I come from and I like it and if you do this, even the learners would imitate that and would want to be associated with their community, but I have to make sure that these girls appreciate one another and I think as I have already mentioned we must learn to live as a community. The girls come from different communities and different parts of Kenya but here when they meet, they meet and live as Kenyans and not as people from specific areas or communities. And even I use the classroom situation and tell them to look at each one of them and see that they come from various communities, but when they get to class they become one, so you try and make sure that they understand one another and appreciate one another. And sometimes I tell them, well I like to see people interacting, I do not like to see the same group walking together from class to the fields, to the dormitories and they really laughed about it. The girls have really changed, in fact the topic on Kenyan people, the fact that it is teaching about intermarriages, interactions even makes them to see and realize that as a community then we are not different from the others and this creates a sense of togetherness. They are able to appreciate even how others live the way they do. So I think this is very helpful because the concept of interaction really brings students together.

Angela: According to the policy, history should encourage nation-building and this should be translated into the syllabus. Do you work with these, that is the policy and the syllabus, and how do you do that?

Teacher: Yes, actually within the civic education we are trying to do civic education. We actually bring on our current issues and here was even a seminar that I attended last year and we discussed how we could integrate civic education with the daily topics, as they thought that it is through history that these issues can be addressed, so if you are teaching a particular topic, for instance

292 about the constitution, you look at the current constitution and how it important and that is very important for us to know our roots. As you see when they know about the laws and their rights then they should be able to live as better Kenyans. And even in the Constitution we look at the Bill of Rights, where you are given your rights, your freedoms, so they know their limitations as Kenyans. And when we have to teach about the laws such that in case there is a problem then the learner know how to go about it, so this is about life issues, so the student in the classroom at secondary level is now expected to know and understand these issues, so as we teach we must integrate most of these things, what is happening in our society, so that is how the policy comes in.

Angela: What about the textbooks? How do they assist you in achieving your goals?

Teacher: Yes, the textbook, as you realized there was a girl who had an answer that was conflicting. So we have a problem with the textbooks; you know history is about facts and it is like every Kenyan is writing a book and we are not getting the true history as different people tend to give different facts, so we get situations where one opinion is contradicting another, so this brings a lot of confusion. By the way, the textbooks we are now using, all of them have been recommended by KIE and I wonder whether, before recommending books, they actually check to see whether whatever information the books have are correct and fails to avoid this confusion. Because the textbook is our source, that is where we get our notes and so when we have conflicting information then it becomes very complicated.

Angela: What would you recommend regarding teaching and learning of history?

Teacher: I think we have talked so much and I have already poured out my feelings but I think we need to make history to become more rich, we might want to even expose our students to other countries, not just our own, so we need to make history more rich and more relevant. So this may be the task of the Ministry of Education, to see how they can make history relevant, what topics must they include and which ones should they do away with, like if you are looking at constitution of other countries, how is it helping Kenya? So we need to teach our history and make it much more richer. Another thing is that they really need to be more keen on the textbooks that we use as this is confusing the students.

Teacher 2

Angela: What I would like you to do is to take me through the lesson and tell me why you teach the way you do.

Teacher: How was it?

Angela: Fine, there was no problem with how you teach but I need to hear from you why you did what you did in class. Why did you choose to teach in that particular manner and not otherwise?

293

Teacher: Okay, I involve the students. I like using that method which is more students-centred than teacher-centred. To have the attention of the whole class and also to make them attentive so that we don’t have some of them sleeping, and I find it that it becomes clearer to the students when they are participating more than when the teacher is the one giving more of the information. If I’m lecturing the students do not tend to remember more; when they participate it has more impact to them than when it is me giving the information. And we find that it makes the class interesting and makes them grasp whatever we are discussing more easily and to contain the class because the class is big and it enables you to make sure that you have all of them.

Angela: Given what you have just said, taking into account, and I’m drawing this from the policy and the History syllabus that History as a subject should be used to nurture the concept of Kenyanization, how do you do that as a History teacher?

Teacher: As a teacher, when you look at History as a subject there are very many topics, for example The Introduction. When the students come into Form One introduction, when you look at the objectives, the reasons why we study history, we find that one of the reasons is for history to create that sense of patriotism in the learners. And also the first topic that we start with, where we try to define what history is and what government is, you find that this makes the students appreciate most of the things that they did not know about this country. For example, when you define what government is and then you look at the branches of the government, what the government is supposed to do, like the judiciary, the legislature and the executive, you find that it creates a lot of interests in the learners, until they want to know and learn more and, most especially in this school, History is becoming very popular with the students. Like this year we have out of a hundred and eighty four students in Form Four, a hundred and sixteen are doing History.

Angela: Why is this so?

Teacher: One thing is that the performance has been so good, as the years go by the students have been doing so well. And also the way we History teachers market the subject when the learners join Form One, the teachers have been able to make the subject quite interesting. Unlike where people believed that in History you learn about Zinjanthropus and such, you find that the topics that are included in the curriculum are quite interesting, like where you have to learn about the process of constitution making, how, how to become a member of parliament. These are things that really make students to be interested. We also learn about the electoral process in other countries, like the US, Britain, India, and such. So these are topics that make the learners interested, as they bring in reality of what is happening in the real life. Also a number of students who have taken Law at the university, also the experience, I have realized that most of the topics we do in high school are actually repeated in the university, especially for those students who take Law. So as we

294 market the subject to the students in Form One, when you tell them the advantages of History. I think the subject is more relevant to what is happening in the world today and that is of interest to the students, unlike when we were taught to get to know dates, you know history of long time, but now students are taught about today’s happenings. Like when you want to look at what is happening in Congo today, in Sierra Leone, we have topics like Conflict Resolutions, the process, how you can solve a conflict. These are things that are very relevant in our world today and this is what makes the students interested. Like in my class Form Three, out of forty six of them, thirty five are doing History and only eleven are doing geography and CRE.

Angela: What about the topic on Kenyans people? I am assuming that it is supposed to enable learners to know who they are, where they came from and all that. In a diverse school like this one, how do you handle a topic like that, this one?

Teacher: Okay topics like that, before I start, you find that I refer to the objectives, why we study history, and one of them is that we study history so that we can appreciate other people’s culture. So when we are starting that topic I normally tell the students that it is very important for us to understand the culture of a particular people so that we stop the stereotypes that we have. For example, when we talk of the Luos practicing wife inheritance, but when we look at from the cultural point of view it was a very good practice and part of a way of life. It was very good because we have to understand and look at the advantages, why it was practiced. It has become bad now due to HIV and AIDS, which was not there before. So you find that when we look at that from that point of view we are learning this so that we can appreciate other people. It becomes very interesting and they have really appreciated.

Angela: From the learners’ perspective, do you get a concept of them understanding who they are?

Teacher: Yes, because you find that most of them, especially in Nairobi, do not know who they are. Some of them you tell them to give you an example from their communities, they can’t, so you find that with that you find a lot of interest. For example, if you are talking about the Nilotes, when you get to the Luos you will find that the Luos in class would really become interested, they would want to know more about that, so I have realized that learners would like to know more and history helps them to achieve this.

Angela: Apart from the ethnic awareness, do you think the learners have that knowledge, understanding, of being Kenyans? Do they view themselves as Kenyans?

Teacher: Not really. The students have been spoilt from home where they have been made to know that they are Kikuyus or Kambas or Luos. So that is when we look at the reason why we study history. We want to create and promote national unity where we look at ourselves as Kenyans. And that is the reason why we have the topic National Integration, where we look at some of the factors that we should emphasize on so that we can forget about our tribes, and also we

295 look at factors that hinder national integration and national unity in a country and one thing that we talk about is tribalism as one of the factors. Because it is actually one of the major things that have made Kenyans not to be united, to view themselves not as Kenyans but as belonging to a particular tribe.

Angela: What teaching methods would be appropriate to you as a teacher to enable the learners to be more patriotic?

Teacher: You find that when it comes to nationalism. First of all sometimes we use songs. These are patriotic songs. You just get to class and start with the song, and even when the students were not aware then they will join and sing. For example, when you are dealing with national philosophy “Harambee Harambee” you start with those songs and this first of all draws the attention of the students, then you analyze the songs and that when you can proceed to introduce the topic on Nationalism. You find that when you teach as far as the students at that particular time are concerned you find that they appreciate. Having looked at the Kenyan communities you appreciate other people’s culture, that is almost at the end of Form One, it has impact, they tend to appreciate.

Angela: Are you saying that History as a subject can promote Kenyanization and nation-building?

Teacher: Yes it can do that, by the time you get to Form Three or Four the student is able to analyze many issues. For example, many students do not know how the problem between Luos and Kikuyus came about, whereby they just believe that it is some kind of prejudice. They look at a Kikuyu and think he she is a thief, or at a Luo and think that they are proud. But there is a problem in this country. We know that the Luos and Kikuyus do not rhyme but having looked at the Form One History, and by the time they get to Form Three where we look at Political Development in Kenya, where students come to learn at Form Four, where the problem came from. During the colonial period you realize that the Luos and the Kikuyus were together, they formed KANU and that is why the likes of Moi had to come up with KADU, but then the problem start around 1966 when all the groups of Oginga were supporting socialism while the others were supporting capitalism. Then we see the Limuru Conference of 1966, whereby Oginga is removed from Kanu and replaced by others. Then in nineteen sixty nine, when Tom Mboya was killed, we find out that the students do appreciate. Am telling you, given the opportunity I would make History compulsory.

Angela: Why?

Teacher: It makes the students learn and appreciate what they have and they learn more about the country.

296

Angela: In some schools the number of students taking History is quite minimal. How do students who have not done History benefit from this? From your own experience, what would you recommend?

Teacher: As a Kenyan and looking at what is happening, I would not mind if History was made compulsory. Looking at other countries, like the USA, where people must learn their history, it is very important. Most people cannot explain why we are the way we are because we do not know our history. There is nothing that does not have a history.

Angela: Do you have anything on the issue of textbooks?

Teacher: No, the new syllabus, I think the people have done a very good job. Like the text we are using - The Evolving World - is so much detailed, such that it is good even for the student who is not doing History, when you just want to learn for your own good. It gives students easy time such that now as teachers we just get what we want, so it is very good text even for those who do not take History.

Angela: What about the syllabus coverage?

Teacher: The syllabus is wide though we are not complaining because we create time to try and complete, but if you go by the lessons in class then it will not be very easy to complete the syllabus.

Angela: Do you ever look at the policy and try to relate the policy to the syllabus?

Teacher: You find that when you have the syllabus you find that in the syllabus you have the national goals, objectives, for education. These are the ones that you may use so that as you teach you are able to advise. You relate the national goals with the specific classroom objectives.

Angela: To start us off I need to know why you teach the way you do.

Teacher: You see the students that we have? These are not the kind of students you lecture to, no, because majority of them are average students and they do not have a reading culture, they are not the kind of students that you lecture and expect them to go back and read, you have to involve them so that they learn to read on their own, and it has worked.

Angela: So what exactly do you do with them?

Teacher: I give them work, they belong to groups. Each student belongs to a group, I select them from the groups. I give them an exercise book where they choose the chairman and the secretary. They discuss as a group then one of them presents to the rest of the class. Other class members ask questions, in fact they take the teacher’s role. I also become a student. The other is where they make notes and then one of them reports. Now from One C the students are sharper than One B. One B they are bright but they wouldn’t talk, but One C you find that they have a lot of potential,

297 they read ahead, that is why when you go to class and you are not fully prepared then they can give you such a hard time.

Angela: How can history be used to nurture patriotism, nation-building and the idea of Kenyanization?

Teacher: Now when we look at the setup of the History syllabus, especially Form Two, basically the topics are geared to help the learner discover where he came from and why things happen the way they happen in societies, especially for different cultures. The topics are in such a way that one is able to understand why, for example, we find that the very good businessmen are not the Luo, because this is something that started a long time ago, that the kind of areas where they settled, the kind of people they interacted with and the kind of people they have come to interact with. And you find that some communities had very little bond with the others. For example, we have the Masai or the Boranas and Somali, even though they are from a nomadic background they don’t come across people, so even when you meet them they do not even have a culture where they are able to interact. That is the reason why when they talk it is always about me. But if you look at the people who interacted, like the Bantus, Teso, they are able to interact very very easily, and even when you go to class you find that the Somali students just group themselves, unlike these other communities. It is only with time that they are able to interact with others. At the end of the topic, there is a topic on Citizenship, that deals with what makes one a citizen and the like, and these are the things that were not there before, so by the time that they are leaving school they would have learnt about so many things that we did not as per the old education system. Like the old syllabus, if you asked someone on how to become a Kenyan citizen they would only talk about by birth and nothing else, because they did not know that there are other ways. You ask these people where did you come from – “God created us”. You see in History, especially in Form One, you are given options that shows most likely this is what could have happened, so take for example a Hindu, how do you explain to him that he was created by God? But you see now these other theories offers an explanation as to why and we find that it keeps the students, the students are able to re-think about the changes in the society, they are able to see why particular changes are taking place and not others, whether people are able to adopt very easily to some changes and not others.

Angela: When dealing with the topic The Kenyans People, how do you view your learners? Do they perceive themselves as belonging to a particular community?

Teacher: They do, especially when it comes to cultural beliefs. Basically you find that most of them are shocked because this is not what they learn at home. They do not have, for example, when you talk of the main economic activities of the Luo is fishing and that is the main reason why Luos are eating fish, and then they will ask you that even Kikuyus eat fish, so they are able to

298 know the reasons why the Kikuyu have adopted to eating fish is because we are no longer Kikuyus we are Kenyans, and as Kenyans we are able to borrow what each and every culture has to offer.

Angela: Would you then say that the students are conscious of who they are?

Teacher: No they are not. They tell me that they are Kenyans.

Angela: Yes but do they have that understanding of what it is to be a Kenyan?

Teacher: Well, that is what is being destroyed by the politicians and the political atmosphere in this country, so by the time they are in Form Three they will tell you that during Kenyatta’s time, the Kikuyus were eating, during Moi’s time the Kalenjins were eating and even now during Kibaki’s time the Kikuyus are now eating, so we cannot really say that we are not Kikuyus as much as our leaders are preaching that we are all Kenyans, they are not practicing it, so we see when they go out there this what they see. So there is a conflict in what you are telling them with what they are seeing and what we expect them to do and what has been achieved, they are not able to. This is a generation that I think, by the time they are leaders they will not practice tribalism the way we know it or have it today, they will not have it because many of them do not even have those roots that those who are tribal have. One of them told me that the grandmother stays in Nairobi, so they do not have a rural home, their rural home is Githurai, so this child even if originally came from Muranga will not have the culture of a Kikuyu, because in Githurai the grandmother’s neighbours are either Luos or Luhyias. There is no one culture so that at the end of the day we do not have a culture, where as long and what you are doing is acceptable it doesn’t matter.

Angela: How does History play that role? How does it encourage learners to perceive themselves as Kenyans and understand themselves as Kenyans?

Teacher: Yes, there is because most of the topics the revised syllabus has, especially on Government of Kenya. In Form One we have what they call ‘National Integration’, and those factors that make us Kenyans. Things that we teach now, things that were not there before. For example, in relation to the Constitution, what we do is that there are laws to teach, we look at the Constitution as a unifying factor. The fact that the Form Two, for example, will tell you one of the factors that promote national unity is the Constitution and they will go ahead and tell you, you know it is because we are all equal before the law, all my right are guaranteed whether am a Luo or a Kikuyu or a Hindu whoever I am. The president is not the president of the Kikuyu in as much as at the end of the day that is what comes out. This is actually a syllabus that realises that we have had this problem because of the kind of history we have been teaching, and even when you teach them other topics it is not about the Americans or about the British, it is not all about Kenyans, it is about people, globalization, international trade, for example. It doesn’t matter who you are. At the end of the day the students are better people that we are.

299

Angela: Now that you have mentioned globalization, how does History help learners to understand other cultures, other nations apart from their own?

Teacher: The worst bit that the History syllabus did in the past is that it never even taught us who we are, so how were we able to deal with outside world? But you see in any of the syllabus – in Form One they are dealing with the Kenyan communities, they will deal with citizenship, national integration in this particular country. When they go to Form Two we don’t look at trade within Kenya communities, we look at trade within other communities. We look at the social, political organizations within other African communities and we try to compare and see the differences between what we have so they are able to understand what is happening. When we look at transport and communication, we start it from here, the border-border, so they are able to develop that and finally it captures the whole world. Like we cannot talk about the trans-Siberian railway or even the Kenya-Uganda railway, they will not understand it if they cannot understand the border- border or even walking, and this is now the kind of syllabus that we have.

Angela: Well, what about the textbooks that you are using, are they helpful?

Teacher: I think this will depend with the kind of students that you have. If I was in Pangani Girls or even Starehe, this book is okay because it is detailed and the students are bright enough to capture everything, but not our boys. I think the Ministry have taken chances. There are some textbooks that are very very brief and if you give a brief book to a student who is not so sharp you are not helping them. I do not have a complaint with any textbook; in fact I proofread the Form One book in nineteen ninety six. The book that has a problem is the Form Two book that has a major problem. It is The Evolving World, and even what we have, the alternative is too shallow. Most people who write books in Kenya are doing it for the money and I don’t think they discuss it with the curriculum developers to find out what we are demanding, and that is one of the problems we are having, because they do not involve the teachers who are using the books to get proper information, so at the end of the day when the books are in the market that is when teachers start to recommend, when it is very late because we have to use that particular textbook.

Angela: What then would you recommend?

Teacher: I think History plays a very important role. It is the backbone of this society because unless we understand who we are, you know CRE is a bit narrow when we talk about who we are because we are only basing things on God, but history is broader. You are given choices and you cannot understand who you are, you do not understand why you are here, what you are expected to do. And when we look at history, what is history about? it is about our past achievements and on things that we have been able to develop, for example things like medicine. You know even something like mathematics the reason why mathematics was developed, it is because it had

300 something to do with their settlement. So to me History is one of the important subjects that can be taught and am happy to be a History teacher.

I would recommend that it be made compulsory. Now that we are getting industrialized, there has been a lot of emphasis on Science subjects but I think we need to give the students a choice. When we say that we need more scientists we are not giving them a choice, we should be able to tell them we need scientists but at the same time we need these other people, because I think the Kenyan society have too many scientists and what we do not have are the social scientists, that is the reason why we have too many social problems. In fact, for the last five years or so they have not been posting History teachers because it is an optional subject. In fact in most schools it’s called a ‘support subject’ or a ‘booster subject’, because in most cases it is the subject that the students perform or score high marks, but the reason why they are able to achieve these high marks is because it incorporates all these other subjects. They can be able to borrow from Chemistry, Biology and other subjects as well.

Angela: What about teacher professionalism? What is your opinion on that?

Teacher: I would like history teachers to be treated like the other teachers. They are not treated the same as others. For example, the Language teachers from nineteen ninety nine have been given three increments and the same happened to Science teachers, and I think that is why History teachers really feel disinterested, and many of them are now opting to do other things like studying masters in other fields and not History.

Angela: Do you have in-service for teachers?

Teacher: With the revised syllabus they are not very many but at least there is one every year. But before you find that it was mainly for the science teachers, but now what we have SEMATE is for the Science and Mathematics teachers, although there has been rumours that one is coming for the Arts teachers.

Angela: Thank you, our time is up. (Interview ends).

12.07.2006

PGDW2 School

Angela: I noticed that in the two lessons you were going through the mid term paper. Could you tell me why you were doing what you did in the classroom? Teacher: We have just done the paper; I returned the papers yesterday. Now what we do, when we return the papers you revise it with the students before they forget. But now the two classes

301

(teacher refers to 1D AND 1C) once we have done the paper you realize the students do not accept that they have failed, they like to think that the answers they have given are the right ones so it is through that that they get to know that they were wrong. They will keep on saying that you marked my paper incorrectly but when you revise they get to know why the answers they gave were not acceptable and this enable them to understand better, that is why I was going through the paper and from there, I would then continue from where I had stopped before the revision. Another thing is that I like revising in class because I do not receive learners individually. First of all, they are too many and this makes it impossible to attend to each one of them in that manner because each one of them has his own question, his own complaint so when I do it in class because I will be going through the whole paper, each learner is able to understand whatever question he had a problem on. Angela: I would like you to take me through your methods, how do you teach history? Teacher: You have to lecture, at least that is the method I use. There are many methods, when I introduce a topic I always use a lecture method, but normally before the lesson I normally tell the students to go through the topic first because if you are teaching learners what they do not know, what is new is very difficult that when you teach them what they already know. You give the students the areas where they are supposed to read ahead of you so that when you go as you lecture they take notes, I also dictate as I identify a point we expound on the point they will as per the notes as they do the work, they do it at the back of their books then when I come to class we do it at the front then they have questions especially outside the topic being discussed, students write this down at the back of their books, but mostly I lecture. There is also a lot of student interaction. You know when they have done it that is read the topic before hand; they already know what you are talking about. For example in the people of Kenya I introduced the topic, of course I just have to identify the groups that is the Bantu, Nilotes and Cushites, so I introduce the topic, I give them the objectives as they are written in the syllabus- by the end of the topic, in fact I tell each student to write; I should be able to do the following so I give them the objectives first, then when I give them the work, they are already aware of the objectives and what they have to achieve by the end of the topic. So when I start teaching as the lesson progresses we confirm tick what objectives we have achieved. I ask the students if we have covered each and every objective that we stated and we move on. That is what I do. For example, we define the Bantus- why do we call them Bantus, we identify them at the end of the day I may draw a diagram showing how the Bantus are indicating the various tribes, various communities, the Nilotes the same and the Cushites the same. On the migrations I had also to draw a diagram showing the migration routes when I draw the diagrams like when I’m discussing the Bantus I write the area where they originated from. The Bantu in the Congo Basin, the Nilotes came from Ethiopian Highlands and the Cushites also I indicate where they came from, so that when you look at the maps students have an idea of where they are coming from and through where of course we

302 also have to look at why the migrated. Infact the reasons are almost the same and I make them know that they are almost the same but they have to be very careful. When we are talking about the Nilotes, they may have moved as they tried to, you know you even talk about the Luo as they followed the Nile, they were looking for water for fishing and on the other part the Bantus because they were basically farmers they were looking for land for greener pastures for their animals. Even when you talk about the way they were attacked by external enemies because of this you talk of them moving because of external pressures. Then who were these people. You will realize that these students do not even know who these people are, they can talk about two unrelated communities, like they can talk of the Luo and the Miji Kenda so you have to make them know where each community descended from otherwise they keep on contradicting the facts. Angela: Topics like that that talks about Kenyan people do you involve the learners. You seem to have a diverse class, having students from different Kenyan communities, how do you involve the learners? Teacher: A lot. Yes I do. After the topic Kenyan People, that is the migrations and all that we are going to look at the social economic and political structures of the Kenyan communities up to the 19th century. That time I may even become tribal and I put them as per their tribes. If one is a kikuyu he is made to discuss the either the political or economic or social structures of the kikuyu and especially if they are going for half term I do tell them to even make a dictionary so for example if you are a Luo you should be able to tell the other what certain words mean For example what is Ja what is Piny, Jaduong, so I actually involve them. The Kenyan community that one I involve them and then I give them work when they are going home to get information from home, whatever source they can use or come across. Angela: I’m looking at how such a topic can be used to nurture the concept of who we are as I believe that it is only after we have known who we are that we can be able to understand other people. I’m therefore interested in the concept of globalization and Kenyanization. As a teacher how does the topic help you to nurture the learners? By the way do you think they have that concept of who they are? Do they view themselves as belonging from a particular tribe or the view themselves as Kenyans? Teacher: That one I think we find in Form Three where they look at African response to the colonial rule then you find that where the communities resisted, the boys feel good but in the communities where they collaborated they look at those as collaborators, it actually comes out in Form Three. Right now it is still limited but if you talk about a cultural activity that they think is backward they laugh but remember when we start teaching history we tell the learners and discuss why we teach history and government. One is to understand our culture, our background then to understand the culture of others so that you are able to understand them. So we tell them that when you see someone like in the dormitories someone who has tattoos on the body you do not laugh, that is that person’s culture, that is part of their culture. There is a boy who is a Maasai with

303 pierced ears, you must tell the boys and make them understand that that is their culture and you make them understand and appreciate each other’s culture and hence their differences they should not think that the other person is primitive. But that idea of primitivity is still there it still comes in. For example, yesterday a boy had an organizer in class then the others were all surrounding him and I got to class the boy told me you see I’m a Maasai and I haven’t seen a thing like this before so I want to see and learn. So you see they become conscious of what they are. And I tell them that we are not talking about a specific person but about the people then and what they practiced and then we see if these communities still practice the same things. Angela: How do you help the learners to understand this concept of the wider world apart from their own? Teacher: You know in history there are quite a number of topics that can help us achieve this. Unfortunately most learners know very little about their language, when we talk about the social system, when we talk of the oral traditions that is passed from one generation to another, I do ask them that each community has a myth, talking about their origin, so I ask learners what myths they have in their communities and most of them do not know, they have no idea. However, in form one students are very good. They will tell you what they know, they will tell you even in their mother tongue, the different oral stories they know, even songs about their communities etc. But when they get to Form Two no one wants to be associated with that “old age” even a boy who used to know lots of oral stories, songs and even dances all of a sudden do not know them or have no idea because in their mind they think that if you know so much about your culture that is traditional practices then you must be “primitive”. So I think that is what it is. Yet I keep telling them that in form one you knew all these things and now how come you do not know. Like the question of linguistics, we find that some words though same mean a different thing lets us say in Kikuyu as compared to Meru. We have two languages they have one word but they mean different things. For example, we have the word Mtumia among the kikuyu it means a woman, among the Wakamba it means an old man you see then you ask the boys from these tribes and they do not know, so I think the problem is the fact that most of these students come from urban areas and they seem not to be in touch with their cultural practices apart from those who live in the rural areas where their mother tongue is being used and they are still able to know about some of the cultural practices that are still taking place within their community. Children from Nairobi or other towns do not seem to have any knowledge of their own cultural practices and even for those who may know remember I mentioned they do not want to appear “primitive” so they never really owe up to let you know that they do know about these practices. You also learn to know that they tease each other about their mother tongue interference, it is like they have still not accepted the various differences that we have. In form 1 the first lessons, they are very difficult to control and you find that some students shy away from speaking in class because they fear the response of the others. I make them now to integrate; I make them understand

304 the various backgrounds that exist in class. When we deal about human rights then I make them know that we are all human beings and so the human being in America is the same human being in Kenya and even in other parts of the world, where a person comes from does not make them a lesser human being. Ones colour, education background, religion those are the aspects that make them think internationally. In fact most of them would think that the whites are better than them. The other day I was talking about food situation in Africa and other third world countries and most of them thought that it is only in Africa where there is poverty, where third world countries exist, so I had to tell them that even in Latin America, parts of Asia people are poorer even than in most parts of Africa, but they do not even believe this. When we talk of slave trade, the Trans Atlantic Slave Trade, when we talk about Africans from West Africa and parts of Central Africa and South East Africa were being taken as slaves, the learners then would want to know why these were happening and by the end of the day the learners are able to identify themselves with other Africans outside Kenya and empathize, the suffering and by the end of the day, they do understand these differences and accept even though it takes time. Angela: I’m drawing my argument from the Koech Policy; it stipulates that history as a subject should be used to nurture Kenyan culture, idea of patriotism and all that and this is then translated into the syllabus and teachers are therefore expected to achieve these goals so as a teacher do you focus on these policy expectations and objectives? Teacher: Yes I do think a lot. There are times like when we have to teach about national integration, factors which promote national unity, and then we look at factors which actually promote national unity. We talk about education for instance, in my class there are students from all parts of the country in fact each district is represented so we look at all the factors, the languages, the use of Kiswahili as a national language and we go to the factors that would limit national unity, like the students do not think or talk of tribalism but they talk of cases they see, for example when a teacher gives more marks to a student from his/her tribe they do not think of it as a general or rather a national thing, if they mention or think of the word nepotism they say that it is when a principle gives a form one place to his nephew and leaves the other one that is not, you see then I try to tell them to think of a wider picture Kenya, when we talk of nepotism what happens. We talk about corruption so after a while you realise that the students do appreciate. I remember one time a boy came to me and said Madam, okay we also teach about good citizenship, how to become a good citizen by taking care of other people’s property so the boy brought the book “madam, you gave us these books in class and you forgot to take them so now that we have realized that is wrong I have brought it back. So like when you are marking and you happen to award a student with more marks they wouldn’t come like the forms ones but when they get to a certain level, they come to you and say madam I think you awarded me with more marks I was supposed to get this. You know if these things happen you get to know that the learners do not only understand but also appreciate what they are being taught. Like even when one copies in class you

305 will get a student come forward to say that that so and so copied but when they remain quiet, then you get to know that there is a major problem. Maybe that is how we come to know that and think of such. Like when we talk about slave trade, we talk about slavery and you tell them you know even today there is still slavery being practiced where the difference is today as Kenyans or Africans we have to take ourselves, we talk about brain drain, we take ourselves there. These days it is not the physical labour but there is a market for the brain intellectuals so by mental then the learners ask me if I will not leave the country and I tell them No this is my country, then you see them being quiet and I tell them you know most of you are not studying because you are looking forward to leave the country that is why you are not taking anything seriously. So you see like when you talk to students in this manner, you see them changing their attitude. So we actually use history as much as possible to help the learners change their attitude, their general perspective to issues and life as a whole. Angela: You agree that History as a subject can be used to achieve and nurture the concept of Kenyanization and nation-building? Teacher: I agree. Yes we can. It is possible because when we are doing systems of government we look at other case examples like India, Britain, USA and when you look at these systems of government we find that it is similar or related to the kind of system that we have in Kenya so they kind of get to view things in a global perspective and I tell them the Americans, and India all these countries were colonised by the British and that is why we have some related practices in terms of government so you find that the learners do not view themselves firstly as the only people who were colonised they get to know about other people and regions that went through the same or related histories or experiences like us and this makes them aware of other people’s practices in relation to the Kenyan practices. Angela: From your experience what methods would you use to achieve this? Teacher: Okay as I said I use lecturing, I would also use taking and giving notes. I also use drama and a lot and it is good. For example when I’m talking about rebellions like the Maji Maji rebellion, I get students do it we have Kinjekitile, they have all these people and this we do during a double lesson [80 minutes] and you see when they are acting they even talk about things that they are suffering from so they are able to talk about the causes of course they will have to have make believe guns and so on water guns etc so we use that. Even when we are talking about the trans-Atlantic trade we also use drama to show how slaves could come all the way and even they show how in human this was like the fat big boys get harassed to try and portray that picture of humiliation that the slaves felt or experienced so that also is a good method. Role play not as much, the other time I was telling them to imagine being selected as the president of Kenya, the swearing in ceremony, we also make them role play and this leads to a lot of discussions like my class, in fact they are normally quite noisy, today they were trying to behave .

306

We must also try to give each one of them a chance, because most of them are shy or timid and that is why I discouraged them from following me with their papers, I encourage them to talk or say whatever they have in class and this helps them to speak up because as an individual he may not be able to come up and talk openly so we use these methods to encourage that. The students also go for trips, like we severally take them to the museums where we get other people the guides to talk to them and teach them. We also watch films like the Sarafina when talking about apartheid and also panafricanism we also listen to Reggae music like the one “Stand out for your rights”. Angela: What about the text books? Some teachers have complained about a number of mistakes and errors from the books? Teacher: Yes in fact that is a major challenge that we are having, in fact I do not know how we are going to cope with it. The books are quite many in fact they are more than enough, and they present confusing and conflicting information such that you find that you use a book for example today in class I was talking about fifty thousand years and another book has forty thousand years the difference is too much, so what I do is that I avoid the figures as much as possible even the years are so confusing as books tend to present different years for the same events so that is a challenge. The objectives are there some books are having more than what we are supposed to cover a lot others you don’t even know how far you are supposed to go and by the end of the day you find out that you have so much to read. Of course there are the typing error some books are also biased. Angela: In a situation where a book is biased and it is a class text what do you do, how do you handle that? Teacher: Yes this book by the Oxford publishers, the book is terrible it has contradictory information like for example you are talking about early forms of communication the book has written gestures so students come to you with a book – madam, it is in the book so I told them that the book professionally I do not use the book to mark I reason critically think critically to answer the question do not just say it is from the book because the book is written by men and women not inspired by God so let us not be slaves of the book we read but must think outside the book, think critically because the book will tell us contradicting things. For example, advantages of these building materials – They are cheap then if you look at the disadvantages they are very expensive so you are left wondering so as a teacher you must be very alert, think and encourage learners to do likewise. A book should not have contradicting points. For example it says that using an oral narrator is very expensive because you have to take them to expensive hotels and you wonder where they got such an idea from, you do not have to take them to the expensive places you are the one to look for them yet the books says you take them to the hotels, I mean these are some of the many mistakes that are

307 presented in the books and this is a major challenge. The books are many and the more they are I have realised the more confusing it gets. Angela: What would you recommend? Teacher: We can start with the challenge that we teach these form ones up to Form Two then we find that the majority of them do not take the subject in Form Three and Four so you get that the objectives that history is to achieve are not put into practice or can never be implemented because the students are or have dropped and taken other subjects. So yes, as a teacher you will teach but even the development of issues as you know the syllabus is about development step by step. In form one and two we teach them simpler concepts introduction to issues, then in Forms Three and Four more complex so there is no continuity so what I will recommend is for history to be made compulsory if we are to achieve the long term objectives. Teachers also need to get more guidelines from the ministry. For example you are given a wide topic like transport and communication. You do not even know how far you need to go. If there could be more guidelines from the ministry that could help. The ministry should also involve teachers when making decisions like when writing new books like Oxford Book Two, the topic in government should be in Book Three and this tells you that they or rather the people writing these books are not conversant with syllabus yet the book was recommended. I can imagine if there is a teacher out there who just uses the text book, remember, it is the class text for Form Two without checking or confirming with the syllabus how a stray he/she would be, he/she will misguide the whole group, a whole topic with wrong information. Also if teachers could have less work load, it would give teachers time to prepare effectively for their lessons. We have a lot of work. I wonder why it is not possible for the ministry to allow teachers to specialise only in one subject such that if you teach history you only focus on history so that we do not have this situation where you tell the learners in a CRE Class about the creation story and then in history you tell them of the evolution theory and then they ask me madam do you believe in God? I tell them that man was created by God and I want them to believe yet I am the same teacher who will tell them that they evolved on the same day! So the learners then ask but you teacher what do you believe in, they get confused. We should have teachers specializing in one area that would mean a lot. In humanities it is as if they are trying to kill it subjects like history are expected to do and achieve so much yet they are not given the power they need. The attitude like they call it a booster subject so it is like it should automatically boost the learner. So we find that when they get forty percent they wonder what is wrong with the teacher they mark as if it is maths or physics so the attitude should also change. Some even call it the dead subject, it is like it does not deal with any current issue yet that is not true we teach about current issues, current government systems etc. Angela: Thank you so much. (Interview ends).

308

19.07.2006

PGBS1 School

The researcher asked the teacher to take her through the three lessons that were observed.

Teacher: We were looking at the Portuguese in the East African coast during the eighteenth century. This is important as it enables the learners to know and learn about other people and also their cultures. The method I used was to enable the learners to internalize the concepts. For example, when I talked of the brutality of the Portuguese to the Africans I tried to relate this to a bully and this enables the learners to get a clear picture of what was taking place during this particular period. I also used the Atlas, in fact in all my lessons I always use the Atlas to enable the learners to get to know where specific regions that we are dealing with in the topic are situated. In this case we were not only looking at Portugal but also countries like Spain, France and also the East African coastal towns. By doing this, the learners are able to connect what is being said in class with reality. They are able to have a better understanding of places that are mentioned in class.

What the policy suggests is that learning should be learner-centred, which is what we are trying to do. Teachers should be able to enable learners to fully participate in the learning process. The focus should be on the learners. There should be no disconnect between the policy and the syllabus. The history syllabus does reflect what is stipulated in the policy and teachers’ role is to make this as practicable as possible. Yet, there is not one specific method that a History teacher can use. It definitely depends on the level, topic and circumstances that the teacher is working on. For example if I were in Mombasa I would have taken my students to visit Fort Jesus. For example, a topic like The Scramble for Africa, this is taught in Form Four. I walk in classroom with sweets without the students’ knowledge and I then throw the sweets. The students will struggle and scramble for the sweets and when everything has settled I then divide them. Some will have none, some will have five, some ten, and this draws their attention to the concept of the scramble and partition of the African continent by the Europeans.

309

A topic like The Kenyan Tribes, given the fact that most of my students live in the city, I always organize a trip to Bomas of Kenya and to the museum to enable them to see how the tribes lived, such that when you come back to class the exercise enables them to grasp ideas and issues that are to be discussed. As I said, it depends on the topic. I always ask my students to bring instruments, like a horn etcetera for those who can get and show it to the rest of the class who did not have an idea of the whole thing. I also use storytelling, like the oral tradition or narratives that relate to the topic that we are dealing with and, by the way, the learners really do love to listen to these stories and songs. It is for some of them the only way to learn about their culture.

Yes, the idea of tribalism is there. Students still view or see themselves as belonging to a particular tribe, especially after the referendum. The kind of politics that exists in the country also encourages learners to think along tribal lines. Of course as a teacher you need to expose the learners on the limitations of this. You need to focus on unity. Remember we talk of unity in diversity. Yes learners need to see that inasmuch as they belong to a specific tribe, they cannot stand isolated. Remember we also say ‘divided we fall but united we stand’. We need each other as Kenyans regardless of our tribal affiliations.

Angela: How does the topic encourage and nurture this?

Teacher: The learners and this depends on how it is taught. However it enables the learners to know more about themselves and also about other people who came into the country. The social organizations ofcommunities has a lot in common - similarities in their practices and this encourages the learners to see or look at other people not as strangers or different but as people with practices they share.

Angela: What about those who argue that the topic only encourages tribalism?

Teacher: I don’t think it does. It is important that learners are made aware of influences in their tribal and cultural backgrounds. For them to know and understand who they are. Surely you don’t expect learners to fit in any society with no identity of their own. Before you embrace other people’s way of life you first of all need to know who you are.

Angela: Would you say there is appreciation of what happened in their country?

Teacher: No I don’t think the young ones are like this or that they value this as such. They are influenced by the media and believe it is good enough. For example, I don’t think my girls would wish to investigate this instead of a modern hipster look.

Angela: What role do teachers play to instill interest into the learners about Kenya?

Teacher: It is important that teachers try to develop interest in the nation. In History there are lots and lots of avenues for this. Every topic is an eye-opener. Early industrialization, for example, what does it tell Kenyans? Inasmuch as we are not yet very industrialized but in the process, the

310 problems that we face are not only unique to us but even those countries that have been highly industrialized were faced with the same problems during their initial stages.

A topic like World War One and Two also makes the learners aware, just like the Africans who participated in the wars. They came back aware of the weaknesses of the White man.

We should enable learners to understand the various limitations we have as country but be aware that these are not problems unique to our country, but can and were realized in many other countries in the world. Even with the limitations we are and should still be able to develop. However, even curriculum developers just like politicians politicise everything. A topic like Unity in Kenya covers very little. It is given very little focus in Form One, yet a topic like that of Agrarian Revolution is taught and it covers and takes more time and given a lot of focus.

Angela: What is your view on this?

Teacher: It is limiting. Teaching needs to be wide in scope. Wey have to give the learners enough if not all information needed. If there are limitations in the class text then the teacherhas to tell the learners how to get the needed information.

Angela: My argument is that History subject is used to nurture the concept of who we are and it is still a good subject that can be used for the learners to know about the rest of the world. There are those teachers who argue that there is a limitation in the curriculum; that the concept of teaching for nation-building should spread all over the syllabus and should not be limited to the History subject; that these concepts should be integrated within the secondary curriculum. Other teachers also argue that if the education system should achieve the goal of enabling learners and the youth to appreciate who they are as Kenyans, then it may not be able to achieve this, given the fact that not all students get the opportunity to learn History as it is an optional subject and so unlike those who have gone through the History curriculum the rest of the youth may not have the same knowledge and are therefore at a disadvantage.

Teacher: In terms of the importance of History, it all depends on the people who are working on the curriculum and also political influence. Third world countries are focusing on industrialization and the focus in education is on Science subjects. Art subjects are dying. When we look at History in the country, the enrolment of History in campus is very low; there are very few historians in this country. It is because of the attitude of the policymakers towards the subject. And also the politicians, they do not realize the importance of History and what it does. To give you an example of the importance of History, when I am teaching industrialization we make posters, we also experiment on electricity; I go to the physics lab and that tells you that we are actually doing physics in a History class. And this can then provoke a student also to invent something, yet they don’t look at it that way. It provokes a student to think, so it is a subject that provokes and yet people do not know that and it provokes us to come up with solutions to the problems we are faced

311 with. There should be pressure on the policymakers and some pressure to be put on the government to make History compulsory. But when we are teaching as History teachers we know where geography comes in, like the use of maps and atlases, geography comes in throughout. When we are talking about the monsoon winds that is also geography. If am going to talk about chemistry and Abraham Newton, the atoms, what they said, I even go to the Chemistry lab and books and tell the students the examples. That is why I told you that books are not limiting. I bring Chemistry book and get information from the Chemistry teacher and then tell the learners what Newton was thinking then, with the aim of provoking some thought in the child. If am going to talk about biology we have Charles Darwin and the species and we look at the plants and then we look at what he was thinking of. How could he have come up and look at certain things. He must have been very observant, and also William Lister, William Morton, Edward Jenner and all those people in the medical field. In Britain, they have history in medicine, unlike Kenya. Why can’t we Kenyan ape that kind of thing, where people study medicine with the aim of becoming researchers in medicine? They open up other avenues. In Britain history is a very important subject, unlike Kenya. So we all need to put pressure on our policymakers to make them see the importance of this subject. It is only when they go out into the real world that they realize that History subject is extremely important. You find that an adult is already working, has children coming to you for tuition. I have done tuition for A level history to adults. They cannot reach the next level because they do not know or have the basics; they are not informed.

Angela: What is your view about this, I mean the way forward?

Teacher: For History?

Angela: Yes

Teacher: I think all schools that teach History, I have the advantage of having taught GCE and I have seen how they treat History subject, should have subject rooms equipped with maps, different types of items such as videos, slides, such that when it is History lesson we can make it interesting because many students miss that. Let the students know that today they are watching a movie, reduce the volume and explain the topic. I think they will get interested. And get to compare and get involved and know that whatever they are doing is important. Like I keep telling them, history and economics cannot be separated. How do you talk about thebportuguese without talking about what they wanted as a market. You have to understand their culture, their way of life, history becomes very important. How do you convince them, the issue of language, administration etcetera? So I tell them that they cannot do BCom and ignore history. You will have to come back and find out about these issues, so those are the kind of things that we need, a History room, well equipped, that is the way forward. And then for me people should give respect to History that it deserves.

312

Angela: What I would like you to do is to take me through the lessons that I have observed. I would like to hear from you why you taught the way you did in the three lessons that I observed.

Teacher: [Laughs] I have been dealing with Agrarian Revolution in Britain and in the USA and I have opted to use the method I was using, to use the simplest language possible because I realized that that particular class, there are quite a number of students from upcountry that cannot express themselves well in English, and I came to that realization when I noticed that they have not performed well in the test, and when I started insisting that they must express themselves, explain their points, then I noticed that they did have a problem. And even at first I noticed that they could not put up their hands when I kept on telling them I was not going to accept one word answer. Yes, most of the time now I have to get them talking and go back to the same topic and revise again so that they can gain confidence, and by doing this they can also improve on the language by doing so many other things that are required in the language, so that is what am trying to do. When am teaching, I don’t encourage them to write notes because it confuses them at this particular level, so I prefer that after I have taught I give them the guidelines if they can be able to use them and if there is something in the textbook that is clear, they can be able to read and make notes. If the textbook doesn’t have enough information I still have to give them my own notes. The reason why the textbook may not have enough information is that it is a new syllabus and we have many books in the market. The curriculum developers in the K.I.E group have not given us a set text, they have just told us approved, so even when you take the books that have been approved, you find that one area is covered well and the other one is not. Like the class text we are using, before we thought that it was okay but I have realized that one of the areas, that is The Results of the Agrarian Revolution in the USA is not covered. They did not even touch on it. So those are some of the problems we are having. And then today I decided to change the method a bit and write down those points on a manila paper and give them to go through what we had already discussed in the previous lesson, and also use the same to present to them so that they use both their sight to see in a different perspective, not only what I write on the board. By the way, am aware that my handwriting is not so good so one word maybe but not writing notes on the board. I don’t so that is why I like presenting work on a manila paper, I like it that way. This enables learners to see, listen and read the same time and probably that can also improve their level of understanding and they can keep it in their long-term memory.

Angela: I’m basically dealing with the Form One History but you are free to draw examples from any other area. From the syllabus Form One History covers many things, for example The people of Kenya, but basically from the first topic that you are expected to teach in Form One to the last, the objectives expects teachers and learners to achieve specific things. I’m trying to focus on the section that deals with the People of Kenya and look at how important the topic is, or rather how the Form One History is relevant for the Kenyan learners?

313

Teacher: I find it really important for the Kenyan learners, like one of the topics we start off with is The Meaning of History and Government and you need to understand what history is and why it is important as a subject. To me that is important. When we deal with government and they are handling aspects like patriotism, they need to really internalize that and appreciate the fact that they are Kenyans and there are certain things that they should be able to do as Kenyans. When we also cover an area like citizenship, what does it entail to be a Kenyan citizen and such like issues. To me I think that this is very important, we are bringing up these learners in an environment where we have different ethnic communities, different races, and it is unfortunate that during this time it is even encouraged by the different political groups in Kenya. They really have to know what it is that makes them Kenyans and they need to know what it is that they really need to focus on that they can be able to see each other as Kenyans and not think in terms of the tribes they belong to. Our students, because they live in the city, they really don’t think about ethnic backgrounds but by and by they find that it is being instilled in them by the social support system, because in the homes that is what is happening. Over the news that is what leaders are modelling to them, but I think in the classroom situation, they can be able to know what promotes national integration, how to look at each other as human beings, to me that is okay.

Angela: You have said that it is important that they see themselves as Kenyans, that they understand the notion of nation and patriotism, but how are you able to transcend what is happening in the social setup, in the political scenario that you have mentioned, such that when the students come to school you are able to nurture what is Kenyan? How are you able to do that?

Teacher: Well, it is a little bit hard, from the historical perspective, because there is nothing clear that will come out to help them, but I find as a CRE teacher, that one comes up very well. Because in CRE we are looking at the origin of humanity as that – a people who have been created in the image and likeness of God and they are equal before God, so we trace it from there and we help them to appreciate each other the way they are, regardless of where they are coming from. That one can fit very well but from the historical perspective we try to help them understand. I try to help them understand that what they are seeing in the political scenario and other aspects of the social life is not what is supposed to be the case. We are supposed to look at each other as Kenyans and not as people who belong to a particular community.

Angela: What about the topic The Kenyan people? What role does it play? When learners get to know more about the origin of the Kenyan people, their ways of life, how does this help them to view and understand themselves as Kenyans and not necessarily view themselves as a Luo, or Kikuyu, as it is in the social practice in the country as you mentioned earlier?

Teacher: Well, the topic is covered, it is helping them to know about their own origin, where they came from, but it has never occurred to me that it makes them to identify themselves with those

314 particular groupings, because we just pick on their origin and then we look at their economic activities, political organization and their social setup, but I don’t think it has a negative impact on them. To me it is just a topic that makes them aware of their origin. To me it is just a good topic that should be in the syllabus to enable the learners to know where they came from, where they are at now and the changes that have taken place. Probably this integration bit needs to be done more so that they can now move from where they are as Kikuyus or as Luos and start seeing themselves as Kenyans, because if the many changes that have taken place now, like urbanization and all that, maybe could help them to interpret that bit, then it could help.

Angela: You mentioned that CRE does it better for you than History. What is in CRE that lacks in History that will not enable you as a teacher to assist the learners see themselves as Kenyans than as belonging to a specific ethnic group? The reason I am asking you this is because the policy stipulates that history as a subject should be used to nurture the concept of Kenyanization, the concept of nation-building and nationhood. My interest is in the fact that, due to globalization, everybody is going or thinking about globalization. I’m looking at how the concept of nation- building, if well understood, can help us to conquer the global world. In essence, if you do not know where you are coming from then you cannot understand your own structures. It is not so easy to go international or even across the border into Uganda and say okay, now I can do this if here in Kenya we can’t. That is how come I’m interested in knowing the role of History in creating awareness. I’m trying to look at well, this is what the policy says and this is what the syllabus says and these are the topics they have chosen, so if teachers use these topics in the long term we are saying maybe Kenyans will understand themselves in order to grasp the concept of globalization better. You have said that it is through CRE that you can achieve this, but what methodology would you use to enable you as a history teacher to achieve this?

Teacher: I’m just trying to think along that line. I need to think about a particular one because I’m trying to see how we can be able to help these learners to see themselves as Kenyans, as nationals of Kenya. Maybe if a lot of interaction can be encouraged maybe – now which one am I thinking of that would work for me in a classroom situation – It is hard to really come up with one. Because now we are talking about the language but the mother tongue is still there, so maybe if we can encourage them to use national language, maybe that one would help. And we can also encourage these inter-school activities where they can be able to have debates and discuss issues of national importance with other schools, be involved in what is happening in the political scenario, because to me I still believe that it is the political leaders who have encouraged this problem of ethnicity in this country and have blocked every progress. So if we can have a situation where we can also have groups where we can also be able to analyze political ideologies that are being instilled in us, the negative role models from our politicians; that we should start looking at things from a more positive perspective. When I think of the referendum, in as much as we were trying to look at the

315

Constitution and see that it was faulty, you find that there were those who blindly followed it because their leaders were from a particular ethnic community. And like Uhuru, who comes from the Kikuyu community, when he saw there was something wrong with the Constitution he did not support it, and you find that if people who are around him did not support him because they were looking at him as a traitor or a betrayal, people were like “no this one you must be very careful, he is not going to unite with us”. You know that kind of thing that is there!

And even the use of songs promotes a lot of patriotism. We need to come up to that because you hear the songs that these old musicians used to sing. They were very patriotic, they were instilling those national feelings like “Kanu ya jenga nchi” and those kind of songs, now you don’t hear any of those songs any more, we have gone Western. Although I’m not a musician I believe music can be used in instilling the national values in our young people if it is encouraged.

Angela: Do you think that there is a connect/disconnect between the policy and the syllabus. If you look at what the History syllabus offers in relation to what the policy seeks to achieve in terms of nation-building, do you think this is achievable or even practical?

Teacher: It is difficult to say yes or no because this is what the policymakers want to achieve, but by the end of the day we need these learners to pass exams so that is where the emphasis lies. So we forget about the attitudinal objectives that are supposed to be achieved, we are more concerned with what is it that the learner is going to get by the end of the day. If she is going to get A then I’m going to be very happy, but not really finding out whether they are internalizing those values that are being cited through whatever is covered in class.

Angela: Are you then saying that it is possible but because you are focusing on exams it affects what is expected to be achieved? Does this therefore mean that even the way you teach is determined by the examination?

Teacher: Yes.

Angela: Okay, you are saying that it is examinations that hinder you from teaching in a specific way. What if there was less pressure, how would you have taught? What methods would you have used?

Teacher: I will use a lot of group discussions. I will also use the learners’ experiences. I would start from what they know to what they do not know. But now it is very hard to do that all the time because you have to cover the syllabus and they have to pass exams, and exams are also very many so you tend to focus more on the exams. Like now, even in our school system here, we closed after we had just given exams. We did not even have time to revise that exam. When we opened we gave them another exam so we had to revise after the exam, so you find that we are dealing more with exams.

316

To start using discussion method you really have to think twice, even the method that I was trying to use today, I was feeling at one time that I was beginning to waste time and needed to move on, because how then will I be able to cover the syllabus. So when you are teaching to be able to meet the national objectives it is sometimes a little bit hard, you need more time, because you need to be able to help each and every learner and get to the level where the learners have internalized the problem, they can be able to express themselves and what they have learnt has now become part of them. So this is always not very easy.

Angela: What would you advise in relation to the History curriculum? What would you say is the way forward for us?

Teacher: I think curriculum developers should meet again to revise the History syllabus and make it more relevant to the learner, and also make it easy both for the teacher and the learner to cover within the required time, because it is becoming wider; the context is just too much that it ends up confusing the learner. Like in this topic we are concerned about migration. You know if you did it the way I did it in my days in nineteen seventy five, where we were looking at the reasons for the migration of the Bantu, you came down to examples f the Bantu and the results of the migration. That is all, but now you are looking at the whole political, economic, and social organizations of the Bantu tribes, so after you have taught the learners you find what they have learnt interferes with what they had learnt earlier, so that retroactive and proactive interference plays a very important role in the mastering of their context. If they did reduce some of those topics and give the learner just what they need to master I think History would be a very interesting subject to teach.

The other problem is that at least initially, before this new syllabus or rather curriculum was implemented, KIE used to call teachers from the classroom setup and they would be able to write a set text, then these other writers would come up with their own texts. But now they are not doing that. I do not know why, so you find that writing of textbooks has become some kind of business. Anybody gets into the market, they write textbooks, some have wrong information, some have sub- standard information, and this is not helping us at all, and even helping the learner. So we are sometimes feeding them in giving them the content, so when they come out of school and are out there you find that they are not able to survive very well because they did not have that chance to be able to even discover information on their own, because it was not even there, so I think that this is a problem that we are having.

Angela: Anything else?

Teacher: Yes, the other thing is that they have introduced some topics in the syllabus and they have not in-serviced teachers, and yet they are expecting the teachers to handle them. That makes us a little bit uncomfortable. When I taught in the old system, before the introduction of 8-4-4, I had a very easy time because whatever I was teaching I had learnt it in secondary, in high school

317 and also in university level. It was really a familiar content that I was able to handle very well, but sometimes I find myself inadequate in teaching some of the content because nobody has in- serviced me and they are just thrown to me and I have to try and handle them. Like there is this topic on conflict resolution there are those two objectives that we have even never tackled them in the department, we have really never known how to handle them. Is it the method? Is it the procedure of resolving conflicts? You know, we have never really sat down before somebody to tell us this is what it is we are just trying to read through, and this is not exciting at all. One person may understand it differently from the other.

And there is also that aspect of looking for the resource persons. Where are these resource persons? Some of them may want financial motivation and the school may not be able to pay. So if we could be able to use those workshops for in-servicing being run by qualified persons, not picking just any teacher from the classroom, because somebody is known he/she is used.

We also need more resource materials in form of maps, pictures, video tapes and all that. We do not have that kind of information. If these could be availed to us it could be very useful. For example, you are talking about the food situation in Africa but there is no map, nothing, and they are telling us to improvise, improvise from what? Well, as teachers we are expected to do it but even then, even us, we are limited.

Angela: Do students buy atlases that they use in Geography?

Teacher: Yes they do have atlases.

Angela: Yes, why don’t you have the learners use their atlases during the History lessons?

Teacher: Yes, this would be okay but most learners do not buy the atlases as they are very expensive. But I’m thinking about something that is included in the text so that they do not have to go looking for the information elsewhere. That will be important.

Another thing is time. Even with the content they have given us only three lessons in a week. The time is limited, they should be able to give us more time. Another thing I do not know if it is happening in other schools is the grouping of humanities, which has also affected the attitude towards history. In the university, they are using the cluster system, so they group all of them together. This makes learners to neglect a subject like History and focus on either CRE or Geography. And in a school like this one of ours, it is grouped with Geography and Physics so what happens is that the very good ones, as it is assumed that if you are very good then you should automatically do Physics, and if you are average Geography, and if you area below average you end up in History, so what happens to the learners is that when they get to Form Three those who are not performing very well are the ones who end up in a History class and they know that they have not been performing very well so they already have a negative attitude towards the subject. I

318 don’t know what can be done, because if it is like we have it here then it will reach a point where the students are not taking History or Physics then it will be okay. The problem is complex because also at national level the subject intake they have interfered with it, in that they insist on that one humanity that has to be considered. For example, in Catholic schools there has been a directive that CRE must be compulsory, so what happens is that the students take CRE instead of History.

Angela: So that means that if a student takes Pure Science he/she can only do one humanity?

Teacher: Yes I think this is a problem that needs to be resolved.

Angela: Thank you. (Interview ends).

21.07.2006

PBDP School

Angela: Thank you for allowing me this time. I would like you to take me through the lessons that I have observed. I noticed you had learner presenting topics. So before we get into various issues, I would like you to tell me why you teach the way you do.

Teacher: Like the presentations, the topic we are doing now is The Emergence of Kenyan societies, so we are really doing many societies at a go. Like we deal with the Nilotes, we have also dealt with the Bantu, and among the Bantu we have looked at the Luhyias, the Kikuyu etcetera, and they are so many and I prefer to let the students participate because there is a lot of repetition and usually I see that when they do it themselves, they seem to understand it better, they capture it faster and even they retain it better than when they or rather I just use lecture method, because you see it involves political organization of each ethnic community, economic and social, so when they present the different groups I also avoid monotony and when they present these, they are able to retain it better – remember they say “I hear, I forget, I see, understand, I remember”. So that is basically why I use presentation when it comes to such a topic.

Then you see that most of the times the girls might be coming from that particular group that they are presenting. Mostly, they are the ones who are very interested, like they volunteer, I usually do not force them. What happens is that I give the topic and when one is from that community they always volunteer or are eager to present. Like the Nandi girls, over some years, the Kikuyus we have had in school are always from the rural areas, so far, sometimes they feel so inferior, so when you see them coming out to say I would like to present my ethnic community then you know that

319 their esteem is high, and that is why I encourage it, and I also want them to be proud of their heritage.

You also find that when they do the presentation, the way they pronounce the names helps the learners to remember something about it. That is basically why I use presentation. But it may be different in various classes, like you saw me teaching about the Miji Kenda because I felt that the learners, well I know the girls, you know you compare and contrast, like the class I have just come from, they are active, they put up their hands and they want to participate, but unlike the other class, when I give them topics for presentation they do not bring it out well. They are some in the class who may present well so I do prefer to lecture them first and then later it is after learning that I would give them maybe thirty minutes to discuss in groups so that they are able to remember. As I told you, there is a lot of reputation so after learning I always follow it up with some kind of discussion.

Angela: How is that done? The discussions?

Teacher: I divide them in groups of six each in class, and then they discuss what I have already taught so they go through it again. I find that this works better. At the end of the day when you give them a question on what they have discussed, they are able to answer it well, meaning that the method helps them to understand better, unlike when I just use lecture method or presentation separately.

Of course we have other methods that I use, even though I did not use them in these lessons. We dramatise also, like after these topics we are going to dramatise the functions of the council of elders, the economic activities. Finally they are going to dramatise that.

Angela: How do students do that?

Teacher: We go out in the field and they have already practiced. I give them about two weeks to prepare and we go out to the field and they have time to dramatise, because they need more. I think dramatisation in history is very important. However, we do not have time for that, actually very limited time if we really have to complete the syllabus. You see the syllabus is very wide and then what has happened is that it is wide and a bit shallow. You do not get time to do a particular thing and really get to understand it properly. It, like we do a bit of this and a bit of that, yah, so it wide and we do not really have enough time, otherwise I would have liked to dramatise every topic.

Angela: So do you manage to cover all these topics, but as you said not in depth?

Teacher: Yes, not in depth. It is not like when we were in Form Six and if you did Austria and you learnt about Menelich and you get into details and you really understood the history of Austria. Even as a teacher you just want to complete a particular topic and move on to the next.

320

Angela: My main interest, especially in the topics you are now teaching, for example The Kenyan People, I would like you to explain if you think that the learners come across as those who appreciate who they are. Let us say, for example, if they are Kikuyus or Luos, or Kambas, do they have this notion of belonging? Is it something you have observed?

Teacher: Yes it is something I see, but as I said it was not there before now, maybe their self- esteem is also raised. I can say that they now appreciate who they are. Like you know the Luo girls (the teacher is referring to the girls who presented the topic – Luo in class), I mean and they can really pronounce the words properly, like the way she said “Gem,” they want to show the others that they are Luos, they know who they are. You also saw the Kikuyus; they were able to even say the words in Kikuyu and this gives me the feeling that they do appreciate who they are. You saw the Masai girls, the fact that they put up their hands to identify with their community and to present. That am a Kalenjin and I want to talk about the Nandi is a sign that they do appreciate who they are, which is really a boost.

Angela: In the policy, the role of History as a subject should nurture the concept of Kenyanization, and should enable us to build the nation. Nation-building is a value that can be nurtured within a History class. If the learners know who they are and understand who they are, and that is why I chose the Form One History, because they learn about who they are as an ethnic community before they know about the nation as a whole. They appreciate their position, so my question is, in a diverse class like yours, how are you able to capture that? How do you help the learners understand who they are and show them how they are limited within their community? For example, I am proud of who I am, my culture, my community, but how does history help me or enable me to know how I stand within the community, my benefits and the limitations in relation to others?

Teacher: Yes that means appreciating yourself and at the same time you have a duty as a patriot, as a Kenyan. Yes I think History does that. Basically, how the syllabus is organized, it brings out all that. Like now we are doing Emergence of the Kenyan Societies. First of all we do the migration, they know who they are and even as they settle, they know and appreciate where they came from and how they lived before. So this I have seen in my learners, the way they appreciate. And then the topic Integration of Kenyan People, when we come to that, we really lean that we must appreciate one another as Kenyans. The fact that you are a Kikuyu, a Kalenjin, a Luo - we are all Kenyans. So we do learn about the factors that bring us together, what unites us, like in our class or school we can see that we have girls from different communities, Luos, Kikuyus, Kalenjin, Maasais, and we must learn to understand and appreciate each other regardless of our differences, and see ourselves as Kenyans.

History as a subject really brings that out because by the end of the day you would have appreciated yourself as a Kikuyu and then as a Kenyan and an African.

321

Angela: So as a teacher, do you have a specific method that would enable you to capture all your learners? I’m thinking of a situation where learners come to school and to your class with prior knowledge, so how do you work with this? This would be either what a learner believes in, which is not necessarily within the syllabus, topic or text. How do you deal with this?

Teacher: You see, learners come from various and diverse backgrounds and when they come here we have to orientate them to understand one another, to appreciate one another and to let them know that they have come from different backgrounds and may therefore have different practices from one another. And we therefore encourage them to live together as a family. Being a boarding school they are expected to do everything together so we have to culture that. We also have the class teachers and housemistresses. The work of a class teacher is to make sure that even in the class they are related and as subject teacher I must also make sure that they appreciate one another. And even through the presentations they are able to understand and appreciate one another. They get to know that so-and-so is either a Kikuyu or a Kalenjin or a Masai, but we have to live together, we have to love one another.

Angela: Are you aware of the policy issues?

Teacher: Yes I do.

Angela: When planning your lessons, do you take into consideration what the policy says and what the syllabus says and expects you to achieve. How do you work with these objectives?

Teacher: We have to work with the objectives. First we have to look at the objectives of each lesson and be able to know that by the end of the lesson what would you like the learners to have achieved? I cannot just go to class without that, and that is why I use the method that I use. After teaching we discuss, so by the end of the day there is an objective I want to achieve [someone comes into the room to ask the teacher about something]. So objectives are the guidelines, without it you would be lost, not focused. I got to class with the objectives, I teach, we discuss and at the end of the lesson I evaluate. What they presented I have noticed when I give them a CAT they get twenty five out of twenty five, so I have now come to realise that I need to involve the learners in terms of their own presentation. So I have now known what methods I use in terms of the topics. Let us say am talking about factors that led to the emergence of societies, the learners can be able to present.

Angela: So you are saying that you are able to look at the policy, the syllabus, and you work with that?

Teacher: Yes, I do that. I look at the policy and then the objectives.

Angela: And how do you use the class text?

322

Teacher: There is a big problem with class texts. First of all, the information does not concur so you find that as a teacher you have got to use as many textbooks as possible. Like now in Form Four, there is a new syllabus, it is like we have a topic in Form Four that talks about political systems, we talk about the British system, American system and Indian. Initially we used to teach about the British and the American but not India, so now even the writers themselves do not have information, they have given very little information, which by the way differs from one text to the other. So what happens, I have to download from the Internet because I needed more information, but the books are very limiting. Yet this is a new topic, so I told the girls during their half term to go home and download and then bring the information. By the way they are very helpful, they go home, they download and then they bring the information and we discus in class. That has helped me. The books, we have are a problem.

Angela: In a situation where the textbooks have different information, how do you advise the learners about this, how do they work with the text?

Teacher: Actually this is upon the teacher. Like I have to go to the library and get the information, we have to guide them on that. The danger will be that during evaluation they will write what they read from the books, which is wrong, and so we have to tell them at times to ignore the books. In fact there are books which we have told the learners to be aware of, even though they have been recommended by the Ministry of Education, the school has bought them. The students have them so then they ask why we gave them the books, but it is upon the teacher to let the learners know their limitations of their class texts.

Angela: How do History subjects open doors for the learners to understand other cultures, other nations? How does it enable the learners to have a proper understanding of other cultures outside the Kenyan community and how she is affected by them?

Teacher: History actually helps. Okay it is upon the teacher by the way. Like now in Form Two, what am talking about, let’s say we have a topic Urbanization, the modern urban centres, so when it comes to London of course I have to tell them that Britons are racists, and like this morning I was teaching that topic and I had read an article from the newspaper. Somebody had said that she went to London last week and met very many Kenyans who want to come back home, and not because of the weather but because of racism. I had to tell them that if they really want to go to the U.K. they better get prepared. So I make sure that as a teacher I always give them more than what is in the books, especially to give them the true picture of what is happening outside Kenya, because actually I think that it is very important because students get a real shocker when they get there, because it is not the land full of honey as assumed. So we do have topics that really help us in History, that is if the teacher is willing to open up the mind of the learners. We also have topics like Emerging of the World Powers, so we talk about the Japanese people, the way they are so keen

323 in time management, they take risks, so enterprising, and they work for life, so we tell them even in Japan now people work twenty four seven, it is like they sleep in their offices, they are so keen, and this is so important not because they may visit or go to Japan but even for their own present time management, as individuals, if they can work keenly on time management, even as Kenyans finally. So basically, if we would talk about History as it is and teachers to be able to take that responsibility to teach all they can, like what I came up with just a few years ago, maybe it is because am a counsellor, but I said I will teach all that I can, all the relevant and important issues about what they should expect. So when I read articles and I find something interesting or useful I always give them and tell them every time and they are interested.

Angela: That is very good. Well now that our time is almost up I would like you to give me your own opinion on History as a subject. What do you recommend?

Teacher: History as a subject is very important for every Kenyan child. If we teach History to everybody, because we teach History and Government, there is no reason why the government should waste money on civic education. In fact it should be made compulsory not optional, because as you can see history actually shapes a person, it shapes a society. Like in this school, we find that we are at a disadvantage. I know the importance of history for an individual, it shapes who you are rather than doing the Sciences and not knowing who you are. If History is made compulsory learners would be able to know about the Constitution, their government and what happens outside Kenya. The children who are not doing History miss out, as most topics that are covered in Forms Three and Four are quite important and relevant.

It would also help the government, if learners do History, they become a better people and they will be able to understand situations. You see, as was evident during the referendum, most people do not even know what a constitution is, they do not know what we are changing. The society should be able to know what they are changing, I find that really scandalous and ridiculous.

Angela: What about the teaching of History? As a teacher what do you have to recommend?

Teacher: I feel that we need to be in-serviced as History teachers because of the changes in the syllabus, so I do feel that whenever they change the curriculum or the History syllabus they should in-service teachers. For example, I have taught for more than ten years and I have never been in- serviced as a teacher. You teach until you believe you know the content so you do not even improve. Teachers would like to change for the better. Teachers need to be dynamic and for me I can always download information, but most teachers do not also like this, thinking that it is complicated. Teachers need professional people to assist them to help them develop.

Angela: Anything else?

324

Teacher: Okay. The first lesson I was introducing to the learners the topic the Cushites. So generally before allowing them to present or do anything like that I had to explain to them. I had to introduce the topic and discuss it with them and then now when it comes to the various communities I then give the learners the opportunity to present.

Angela: Why do you do that? Why do you allow the students to present?

Teacher: So that they know it much better. You know if the teacher just stands there and it is you who keeps talking I think they get bored. Somehow when there is a change then you see them concentrate. And even for the students I think when an exam comes and it is set from what he had presented he will be able to do much better.

Angela: The fact that you have a diverse class in terms of community representation when you are involving the students, that is when you ask them to present, do you consider their tribal background or they just present regardless of ethnicity?

Teacher: No, I just group them and they discuss in groups. But these ones who presented had just volunteered, they wanted to present.

Angela: According to the policy it is from the Form One History that the concept of nationhood is nurtured. The topics taught are supposed to make the learners aware of who they are and maybe they can be able to understand the global context. So what is your opinion on this?

Teacher: About teaching of the Kenyan communities?

Angela: Yes. .

Teacher: It makes people to know where they came from and how they have reached where they are. I always say to students, then you will be able to appreciate some of the things that your nation has done.

Angela: Do you think it is working?

Teacher: I think it should work. I think it should. Remember when we are looking at things like the government, you know you might have the government but you take it for granted, so now when you study and you see the things which the government does for you and why this is so then you get to appreciate the government.

Angela: The History syllabus encourages learners to know about their ethnic background and also about other communities. As you said in Form One, you are now dealing with the Kenyan ethnic communities. Why is this important to know?

Teacher: What do you mean?

325

Angela: For example, like now you are dealing with different communities, when you are teaching this ... especially when dealing with the different ethnic communities what do you wish them to learn, I mean the learners?

Teacher: Well, some of them will come up and tell us more about their communities.

Angela: What is the importance of all this detail - information?

Teacher: You know most of them live in town, some don’t even know, some of them never even go to the villages, home, or they hardly go so it is not deep in them. It is just the few students who come from home who may tell you about their community.

Angela: Can you then say that the students understand the importance of knowing about the Kenyans before and up to the nineteenth century?

Teacher: Yes.

Angela: Well, if that is the case, then would you tell me how History helps?

Teacher: We need to teach them about the cultures of all groups so once they know about their culture and those of other groups then they will be able to interact with other people.

Angela: Well how does the History syllabus assist you in achieving this? Do you have topics that enable you to do this?

Teacher: No, you know I have only started to teach History from last term, so this is the fourth topic I’m in. We started with looking at the sources of history, we looked at early man then we looked at agriculture and then now the Kenyan communities.

Angela: How are these topics that you have mentioned - enable you to help students interact with each other and talk about each others’ qualities?

Teacher: Yes, like in agriculture you look at early agriculture in relation to what other communities practised.

Angela: How do these topics help you?

Teacher: When they learn about agriculture, let us say in the UK, they get to realize that we all borrowed ideas from these people and that helps them to appreciate other people.

Angela: What resources do you have to help you as a teacher?

Teacher: Yes, the textbooks are very useful.

Angela: Why?

Teacher: You know there is nowhere you can get information from if textbooks were not there.

Angela: How many books do you use?

326

Teacher: I use two.

Angela: Are these adequate?

Teacher: Yes I think so I haven’t taught History for a long time but as for now I use two, when I don’t get information from one I get it in another one.

Angela: I there anything else?

Teacher: Policy, the syllabus what?

Angela: Do you have the documents in the school?

Teacher: No I don’t know whether they are there, I have never seen them. What ...policy?

Angela: Yes, the latest policy is the Koech Report.

Teacher: What does it say?

Angela: I’m interested in what it says about History. History as a subject should be used to create that sense of belonging so that learners know who they are. If this is what the policy says then how does the syllabus enable you to achieve this?

Teacher: Are you asking…? To create awareness for the students, I think that it is good that they are taught especially about the government, I was quite impressed. You know the functions of the government, how the leaders are chosen, or what they do so it really makes you to appreciate. It also makes you aware of where you originated from so once you know where you originated from I think you will get started with appreciating what being Kenyan is all about.

Angela: Interesting, but you have just said that you have no idea about what is entailed in the policy. As a History teacher, in terms of using History as a subject that would create the awareness you are talking about, if that is to happen, as a teacher, what will you recommend?

Teacher: What I don’t like is this topic of Early Man. You know that topic, some of the things are not true but we are just teaching them because they are in the system that man evolved from ape to a what, what you know, they are like nine stages of evolution. You know in History it is like it is true but if you look at the Bible it’s a different thing.

Angela: So should we teach History alongside the Bible?

Teacher: These ones which tell us about Mumbi and Agikuyu. They are entertaining but hii ya, Charles Darwin is so complicated …

Angela: If there is anything you need to add, for example, is there something that you think you can add to your lessons?

Teacher: Maybe if I could draw a map to show how they migrated.

327

Angela: Why?

Teacher: To make them see clearly how the migrations took place. You see now there is no time to draw those maps. We are always busy.

Angela: Are you rushing due to limited time or what?

Teacher: Yes.

Angela: Thank you. This was interesting. (Interview ends).

Lesson 2

Angela: Thank you for the time you are allowing me. Let us talk about your lesson. I would like you to take me through the lesson and explain to me why you teach the way you do.

Teacher: It depends on the students. I normally use discussions but with the Form Ones you cannot use discussions because they have not read ahead and they cannot. In Form One, you can only use the lecture method because you are the authority. They are still not sure why they are there. I mean in Form One, even if you tell the students to read they do not know so they will not so you just end up wasting time and you remain with so much syllabus uncovered. But in the other classes, like Form Two, once you have trained them, you have taught them. You see I do not know them and once you know them you can even pin pint the bad boys, their character, what marks do they get, like now they have not done exams so you cannot even gauge them. So you mainly do the lecturing. But when you get to Form Two you can give them work that they discuss in groups and they come and present.

Angela: How do you train them?

Teacher: For now with the topics we have to cover you have to talk about the Kikuyu, the Luos, like now when I get to the Luo you are teaching about circumcision, you are telling them that Luos removed six lower teeth ..., it will only bring in tribalism because you will now find them laughing at the Luos who are there and so on. Maybe in other classes the topics are better but in Form One I do not know.

Angela: It is the Form One History that should enable the learners to be aware of who they are to enable them to understand other people or cultures. You do not see it as creating understanding and awareness?

Teacher: It will create but at the same time dividing the students.

Angela: What would divide learners?

328

Teacher: So far I have to avoid pinpointing like you are a Luo, so tell us about the Luo. I have tried to avoid that because have noticed that the others will now keep on saying “ohh the Luo” or whichever community, so I have tried to avoid that, like if I know you are a Luo then I give you something else to discuss, so that they feel that they are regardless and where they come from is not the main focus.

Angela: You have just said that you think that the learners do not appreciate who they are but do they then view themselves as Kenyans?

Teacher: Yes that one they do. As you teach quite often, like when you ask them what is happening in the world today they will always start with Kenya, until it gets to the point where you have to ask them about the rest of the world. That shows that they are interested in their own country.

Angela: How does History as a subject help them to nurture and strengthen that, the idea of being Kenyan?

Teacher: Like the topic we are doing, Reasons for the Struggle for Independence, that one actually make them feel sensitive about their country and you tell them about the freedom fighters, Kenyans were hurt in the various ways, what they did, you start seeing them actually coming alive about their country. And we proceed to the Constitution, the government part, it’s like they become alive and so sensitive to anything that is being said by the Kenyan leaders, and even by outsiders about Kenya. Yah, so I think those topics do help.

Angela: How does History allow learners not only to understand themselves as Kenyans but also to understand other nations and cultures outside Kenya?

Teacher: Like now, when we talk of economic activities of the communities that is very low and the learner is there and then the other tribes which are better and so on, so other people feel that they are better and so on and they make fun of them, maybe in another setting but not in Nairobi. Like now, if I can avoid the topic and stop telling them about everthing to do with the Nitlotes because like when I look at the issue of Kikuyu and Luos, why do they hate one another and they are living far apart from each other? The White man came and told the Kikuyu people that these people do not circumcise they are like this and that told the Luos that the Kikuyus are like this and that and I feel that we are doing the same thing, we are not helping the students.

Angela: You seem to be saying that there is division and that is why you do not like to teach the topic as it encourages tribalism.

Teacher: Yes, topics that deal with the origin of man are dealing with tribalism.

Angela: So in the History syllabus what topics would help you nurture the concept of who we are as Kenyans?

329

Teacher: Maybe when you are talking about the Kenya Constitution, the government and other topics within government can nurture patriotism.

Angela: By the way at what level do you teach this?

Teacher: Form One and Two.

Angela: What method do you use?

Teacher: You make them discuss because this is something that they don’t even have to read, it is something that they live and know.

Angela: So they just discuss?

Teacher: Yes they discuss.

Angela: What about the issues in textbooks, how relevant and helpful are they?

Teacher: I think the problem here is that these books have different information, these are three books which have not been synchronised one can give one date the another one a different date, so I think it would be better if the Ministry decided on one textbook for all of us to use. Some books even have wrong information.

Angela: So what do you do in such a situation?

Teacher: So apart from the fact that we need the textbooks for guidelines, I think for History they should be very strict on what books they recommend and the kind of information we have in these books.

Angela: How do you think the History syllabus opens windows for the learners to see the outside world? How can these differences enable the learners to understand the world?

Teacher: Yah, like when we are doing things like changes in industrialization and we try to compare to Kenya, we look at what happened and how it affected us because you cannot ignore what is happening there. Then when we come to, say, the World Wars, international relations, we also get to see the things happening elsewhere eventually land here, we are caught up in it, so they begin also to open up their eyes to the world like the US, especially when we tell them that people are very keen to go to the US, but you do not know what is happening, this is the reality. They should also realise that although they are Kenyans, they deal with the world as a whole as well.

Angela: What is your opinion on the texts that you use?

Teacher: The textbooks that we have we would like some improvement. Like there is The Evolving World for the students, it is a little bit too much, but the Milestones is bit better. The only problem is that it tends to make the students go for the points, it doesn’t tell the story for the students to get the points, the points are always listed. It is like they are trying to answer a question.

330

But if you combine them, like you use The Evolving World, Milestone and the History and Government, which even has diagrams and maps unlike the two, so I try to look for which book has the best information.

Angela: What methods would you use to bring out the concept of Kenyanization, like to let the learners know who they are, what methods would enable you to achieve this?

Teacher: I tend to lecture, especially if I have to clarify things. It helps because it enables me to emphasise things that I feel they actually need to be brought out strongly. Apart from the lecture methods I also use question and answers method. I ask the learners a question and when they answer from there I would know what is lacking. The learners then begin to realize that although I answered this, the teacher added this or emphasized it, so question and answer I do that. Then of course there is classroom presentation. There is also a method that works well that is group work, but for me so far I have not tried it because our boys tend not to work when you give a group work. Only one person will do the work and present, so I have tried to avoid that and instead I give an individual, and then of course there are times I just allow questions in class, I just let the students to talk and they come up with suggestions etcetera.

Angela: What would you as a teacher recommend for History as a subject to be able to achieve its intended objectives or goals?

Teacher: I think one of the things I would like changed is the attitude of the people, particularly the Ministry. You know they are not giving History that weight. Like for example, I would not mind the lessons being increased from three to four in Form One and Two and Form Three and Four let them have five lessons so that actually we can exhaust the topics and not have to run over the topics, we are forced to run because of the syllabus. Also the textbooks, because this is also quite a battle, because the administration tends to buy textbooks for the Science subjects and some people think that History you do not need all these textbooks, one can just read, but what they forget is that if it is something that is so easy and people can just read, how come not everybody can or is doing History and passing History for that matter? So that attitude if it changes can help a lot.

The syllabus, also they have improved a bit, they have changed some topics but there are still some topics like I think in Form Two there was to be re organization of the syllabus. It has too many topics and too wide, otherwise the other classes I think are okay.

The another thing is that there is a tendency of schools pushing teachers, you must complete the syllabus by July, this is coming up very strongly, like now by July you must have completed the

331 four years syllabus. Like now we doing our mocks and the questions are set as if the students have completed the syllabus, which means by the time they begin their mocks the first week or at times even last weeks of June the teacher must have completed the syllabus. That is putting too much pressure especially on people like us, because our boys normally report to school after a month or so late then we have a lot of interruptions, like they are sent away for fees all these problems. So when now you are pressurised to complete the syllabus, like people in Nairobi school who are there throughout, and they are even a month or two ahead of you, and our students are not always the cream, and sometimes they find the pressure to be too much and they give up.

Teacher: If I give you my opinion because I do not like the subject, I do not know! I’m saying this because when you come to schools they call it a ‘booster subject’, so when the students are being told can you take History, it is a booster subject so even the opinion of the students is quite low because they feel “aaah this one it is very easy we can pass because it is a booster”. But when they have categorised some as booster it really puts you down as a teacher because they have already labelled it and because mainly am a teacher of English and when you are teaching English you tell the students that English is a good subject and then this one is a booster then it becomes very bad.

Angela: What is your opinion on History as a subject that can nurture patriotism? What would you say?

Teacher: When you look at the Constitution of the country people learn about it and what can be changed. We are Kenyans and so when you talking about things like trade and you tell them how trade was conducted, so they feel great, our people were traders a long time ago. It makes one feel that you belong to a country because if we do not tell them about the history of the people how did we get to where we are, we started from somewhere; like the Bantus came from such and such a place to settle in this country; then there is colonialism, how did they come to Africa and what did they do, so they get to ask why we are poor because they still steal from us, then they feel very annoyed and they want to make their country a better place, like for example they look at a White man like a god, but when they realise am poor because these people are still stealing from us even now , then they feel we are proud to be who we are and they make sure that there are no more evils done to them, especially if a Kenyan girl will realise why am I with this mzungu because we see them as very bad.

Angela: Is there any in-service for teachers?

Teacher: Yes, the ministry always calls us to go for seminars.

Angela: Yes, what do they do? What do they focus on?

332

Teacher: We have had one dealing with examinations, particularly when there is an examination change so that teachers get to know what to expect and all that. In the process we also look at the textbooks, the performance, what we need to do in order to improve and how to examine.

Angela: Any other thing you need or want to say?

Teacher: I think I have exhausted, but I think I would suggest that History should be made compulsory so that each and everyone knows about our society. By the way, there was a time when History was compulsory, I do not know why this changed. Well I think that would be all.

Angela: Thank you so much for everything. (Interview ends).

26.07.2006

PGBS2 School

Angela: What I would like to start us off is for you to tell me why you do what you do so that I understand why you teach the way you do.

Teacher: I was just going through the work because I always tell them to read ahead, because they have the textbooks and also because the syllabus is very wide and I cannot do every single topic with them, you know the curriculum ,especially Form One and Two, so I tell them to do this topic or this chapter such that when I come to class we just discuss, so that we can move faster because if you are to do each and every topic with them you will never be able to complete the syllabus, and that is why I tell them to read ahead. And I make sure they read before and when I go to class it is just questions we answer, questions and we answer and then also they are bright most of them are good boys; I give them work and they do so when they are discussing my assumption is that they have done the work. When I give them work I check and I assume that they have done it, if it is a weak class because I have taught in schools where students are very weak, so I will not let them do the work on their own but I will have to teach the topic myself and give them notes and make sure that they have copied the notes. I even write on the board and even try to find out who have done the work and who have not, but our boys are generally good, they are obedient and if I give them work I know that they will do it.

Angela: Does it mean that the method you use will depend on the learners?

Teacher: Depending on the nature of the students, like I have taught in schools where students are not so bright. Angela: So what do you do?

333

Teacher: In such a case I do more in the sense that I write the notes I give them and that they write what I give them and even in some other classes here, like in Form Three class that is rather weak, so in that class even though they are Form Three I make sure that I do more with them and I make sure they have written the notes and that they are doing what I’m saying because if I do not do that I know they will never do it. So unlike the class I’m dealing with in Form One, where I know that they are not only bright but still eager to please the teacher, I use this method because with them I know they will do what I tell them to and it is only when they move to other forms that they start getting difficult.

Angela: So whatever method you are using now [teacher interrupts: “I do not always use it all the time.”) … Does it help you achieve your objectives?

Teacher: Yes I do achieve my objectives.

Angela: How can history enable you to nurture the Kenyanizationexpected by the syllabus?

Teacher: That will depend on the topic. Like in Form One I was teaching the migrations, maybe that one will not help them so much in terms of nation-building, but the last chapters are purely on government so those are the chapters which I use to teach them about the government, nationalism, patriotism, so when you come to this chapter, it is when the learners come to understand the government, what they are going through. Migration and those other topics may not enable learners to associate it to the present but when you come to topics like government it is what they see, government, elections, parliament, it helps them to understand and to know what they see out there, it becomes more real when you get to teach these last chapters.

Angela: What about the topic you taught on Bantu People? Do you think it enables students to know who they are, and where they came from?

Teacher: Yes, you see this is a national school and we try to encourage the students not to think of themselves in terms of where they come from?

Angela: Why?

Teacher: We want them to think of themselves as members of Lenana School because in that way they are able to view themselves as Kenyans. They are students and those other differences about who they are, where they come from or even their social status, we try not to encourage that.

Angela: Yes, how is that useful, discouraging students from knowing or identifying with their communities?

Teacher: It makes them feel as one, they do not view themselves as different but as members of this school, this community, so that they do not have these differences.

334

Angela: Don’t you think that the topic enables the students to know the differences within the different tribes or communities because coming from different communities they tend to have different perspectives about other communities and don’t you think that when you highlight these then they will be able to understand how they are positioned or related to other people who they tend to view otherwise, that they may be able to appreciate other people better? How do you help the learners to appreciate each other’s culture because I believe that is only when one is able to understand and appreciate the other person’s culture that he will be able to understand each other as one, but if we do not understand each other we cannot possibly view each other as one?

Teacher: Okay, first of all I make them to understand because when we talk about these communities, there are topics on all communities, we look at their cultures so we make them understand that in spite of all these differences should not interfere with the way they interact with each other, they should not feel that they are different from one another irrespective of who they are or where they come from, but we make them understand the cultures of different people. We srarted with the Bantus and we study the other communities as well.

Angela: When teaching aout the Bantu you involved students, what role do you think this will play in encouraging them to see themselves as one?

Teacher: Yes I always ask them how they do things, like I would, for example, ask the Bantus, Luos and others, how they do things or even the Turkana, but then now I make them understand that these differences should not make them feel like they are very different from one another in spite of the cultural differences. We try to make them not really think of themselves as Luos, or Luhyias, or whatever national unity.

Angela: Do you think the students look at themselves as Kenyans? Do they appreciate being Kenyan?

Teacher: I think so.

Angela: How are you able to nurture that the concept of Kenyanization? How does being Kenyan help them understand their place as part of the wider society? How does this understanding enable the learner to fit into the wider global society?

Teacher: It helps them in the sense that they are able to understand first of all themselves, and then one another, and then they are able to understand that those differences that have been there in their backgrounds should not really separate them. They should appreciate one another’s culture, one another’s background, and know that the differences should not make them feel like they are different people. They should take themselves as equals, that is what we try to encourage because even as teachers we do not look at them like you are Akamba, or something like that, in fact sometimes I never even know where some of them come from, so we try to make the students feel

335 the same way, that they are just members of the schools that those other differences may not affect them.

Angela: So how does this process enable the learner to understand the global? We may have a syllabus that deals with the local but may not open windows for the learners to understand the outside or wider society, so how does history as a subject enable the learners to have an understanding of the global?

Teacher: It does that because other than just teaching about history of Kenya, we also teach about history outside Kenya. We have history that deals with different governments like Britain, USA, that is after we have talked about Kenya, this is Paper One, we also teach other countries outside Kenya and that is Paper Two, so that they are able to understand other nations.

Angela: So are you saying that history can help the learners to understand the global?

Teacher: Yes it does very well.

Angela: Briefly, do you ever work with the policy?

Teacher: Yes, the Education Commissions, in fact we teach that topic in Form Four, about the different Educational Commissions. We teach about how education has developed the period before colonialism and even after independence, so we have looked at these Commissions and we have seen what is applicable, then we tell them about how we have come up with the system of education. They understand and appreciate. They are able to compare the old system of education and what they are going through and they realize that it is more relevant with what they are doing or what is going on today. They quite understand and appreciate.

Angela: Now, what would you recommend in relation to History syllabus? What can be done to enable History as a subject to achieve the national goals?

Teacher: Maybe one of the things that have really put me off for a long time is about the curriculum, it is over-loaded. I do not know whether to call them irrelevant but there are a lot of things that we do that really appear irrelevant. For example, some topics that deals with history outside Kenya like … [teacher unable to come up with an example]. Eh, in Form One or Two is where I think we have topics like Transport and Communication, it is wide also. So I was feeling like if there was more of government than those topics that deal with a lot of outside Africa. I feel that it is not really useful to the learners, some of the topics that are outside their experiences, I feel that they do not help them.

Angela: But remember you have just said that if they learn about other countries, it would help them to understand the world.

336

Teacher: Other countries but not very remote. The problem this remoteness, like the problem about early man, we go into such details about early man till even the Form Ones make fun of it because they do not see the relevance of learning about Zinjanthropus, Australopithecus, I mean all the stages.

Angela: Something else? Do you have anything to say about class text?

Teacher: Some of them are very confusing. Like the one we recommended and for a long time these were the books that were recommended, but now some of the topics are covering even what is not included in the syllabus, it is like they are moving away from the syllabus.

Angela: So in a case where the students have to use the books, how do you guide them?

Teacher: Yes we tell them what they need to do.

We also need to make History compulsory to the students. We need to pinpoint to the learners the importance the importance of History, like what History can help them achieve. So we give them a list of careers that they can do.

The students also complain that History is wide, it involves a lot of reading and we as teachers are also forced to do a lot of marking. In fact, like the year two-thousand-and-two to two-thousand- and-four, we only had about twenty one students who did so well, and this also made most learners to take History, and the following year we had more than fifty; we had students so our marketing strategies works and we have been doing very well.

Angela: Are there history organizations for teachers?

Teacher: There was a club some boys wanted me to be the patron, some Form Four boys, and then I told them to go ahead, then they told me that they had started, that they have members and they wanted me to arrange so that I could take them to some historical sites, museums, but then we ran out of time, they got busy with exams and we also had a problem with transport, but the boys were very keen to start a historical club and they hope this continues. We get people from the Ministry and even from the university once in a while to give teachers talks.

Angela: That’s good. I would like to continue with this interesting aspect and know more. But, I cannot keep you longer. It’s late in the day for you. Thank you so much. (Interview ends).

337